Title
Velasco vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. L-47544
Decision Date
Jan 22, 1980
Alta Farms defaulted on GSIS loans; petitioners built houses on foreclosed land, unpaid. SC ruled GSIS liable for labor/materials under equity and Civil Code, awarding P607,328.27 plus interest and attorney’s fees.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-47544)

Factual Background

The loans by GSIS to Alta Farms, amounting to P3,255,000.00 and P5,062,000.00, were secured by mortgages. Due to defaults in payments, Alta Farms transferred its obligations through a Deed of Sale With Assumption of Mortgage to Asian Engineering Corporation without GSIS's consent, violating the mortgage agreements. Subsequently, Asian Engineering contracted Laigo Realty Corporation to develop the property into a subdivision.

Construction Agreements

Petitioners Lumanlan and Velasco entered into contracts with Laigo Realty to construct houses for buyers in the subdivision. Despite their construction work, they faced non-payment issues as Laigo's checks to them were dishonored. This led to initial claims against Laigo, but after the foreclosure by GSIS on Alta Farms' properties, the petitioners sought reimbursement directly from GSIS for the labor and materials used in constructing the houses.

Legal Proceedings

Petitioners filed a case against GSIS for P607,328.27, asserting they had provided labor and materials for the construction of houses that the GSIS now owned following foreclosure. GSIS denied liability, arguing there was no privity of contract between them and the petitioners, maintaining that any claims should be against Laigo Realty Corporation.

Court of Original Jurisdiction

The Court of First Instance ruled in favor of the petitioners, concluding that they should be compensated for their expenses, ultimately valuing their claims at P607,328.27. The trial court noted the rising costs of construction materials and the fact that the GSIS stood to unjustly benefit from the improvements made by the petitioners.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals later reversed this original decision, ruling that the motion for a new trial by GSIS was timely and valid, citing that the essential issue of privity of contract rendered the original decision flawed. However, it was recognized that procedural matters should not alone dictate the merits of the case.

Supreme Court's Assessment

The Supreme Court examined the case with respect to GSIS's admitted ownership of the properties in question. It ruled that despite the lack of a direct contractual relationship, GSIS was liable to the petitioners under equitable principles, as they had profited from the petitioners' contributions. The Co

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.