Case Summary (G.R. No. 127761)
Factual Background
The plaintiff supplied construction materials valued at P7,151.18 on credit for the defendant’s house. Despite the defendant's partial payment amounting to P5,750.48, a balance of P1,400.70 remained unpaid. The plaintiff claims that various demands for payment were made, which were ignored by the defendant. The defendant, in his response to the complaint, denied the allegations and asserted that no business transaction had occurred.
Proceedings in the Lower Court
After a thorough hearing, the trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to pay the remaining balance of P1,400.70, along with legal interest from the date of filing until full payment, plus the costs of the suit. The defendant subsequently appealed this ruling, arguing that the court erred in its findings regarding the existence of a business transaction and the legitimacy of the unpaid amount.
Evidence Presented
During the proceedings, it was shown that the defendant, due to insufficient funds, sought assistance from architect Fernando Ocampo to obtain credit from the plaintiff for construction materials. The plaintiff’s manager, Yu Khe Tay, opened a credit line for materials not exceeding P2,000, based on the defendant's recognition as a public official. The materials were subsequently delivered, though it was established that the defendant meticulously managed his credit to not exceed the initial limit.
Payments Made by the Defendant
From February 1929 until July 1931, the plaintiff regularly sent monthly statements to the defendant, who made several payments ranging from P200 to P1,711.38. Total payments during this period amounted to P5,750.48. The defendant attempted to counter this evidence with his own testimony, claiming that architect Ocampo was responsible for the material expenses due to a contract he had purportedly entered into.
Analysis of Contracts and Responsibilities
The defendant relied on a contract (Exhibit 1) that was presented but not proven to be fully executed, as the defendant failed to produce supplementary documents that could have clarified the contested terms. The court found that the testimony of architect Ocampo contradicted the defendant’s claims, notably that the construction was to be managed by the defendant himself, as e
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 127761)
Case Overview
- This case involves a dispute between Yutivo Sons Hardware Co. (plaintiff and appellee) and Tomas Confesor (defendant and appellant) regarding unpaid construction materials.
- The case was decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on March 6, 1937, under G.R. No. 42701.
- The amount in dispute is P1,400.70, which the plaintiff claims is owed for construction materials supplied to the defendant.
Factual Background
- The construction in question took place on a lot at the corner of Arkansas and Florida Streets in Ermita, City of Manila.
- The defendant, Tomas Confesor, utilized materials valued at P7,151.18, which he obtained on credit from the plaintiff's store.
- The plaintiff alleged in its complaint that Confesor had failed to pay the outstanding amount of P1,400.70 despite various demands for payment.
Procedural History
- The defendant responded to the plaintiff's complaint by generally denying all allegations.
- After a hearing, the trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering Confesor to pay the outstanding amount with legal interest and costs.
- Confesor appealed the trial court's decision, asserting that there were errors in the trial court's findings.
Issues on Appeal
- The appellant raised three main contentions in his appeal:
- I. The trial court erred in finding that there was a business transaction between the parties.
- II. The trial court erred in concluding that Confesor had been paying for past