GR L-9531 Warner Barnes V Reyes

EN BANC his denials of knowledge, etc.
, were false, for

he could meet the charge by saying that his
G.R. No. L-9531 May 14, 1958 denials referred only to matters of which he had
in fact no knowledge or information.
(Kirachbaum Eschmann, 98 NE 328, 329-330.).
WARNER BARNES and CO., LTD., plaintiff-
appellee, vs. GUILLERMO C. REYES, ET
AL., defendants-appellants. This is a foreclosure suit. It is alleged that the severally
indebted in the sum of P9,906.88, secured by a
mortgage. A copy of the mortgaged deed was attached
PARAS, C.J.: and made a part of the complaint. There are also
allegations of partial payments, defaults in the payment
The plaintiff-appellee filed against the defendants- of outstanding balance, and a covenant to pay interest
appellants an action for foreclosure of mortgage on and attorney's fees. It is hard to believe that the
August 20, 1954. The deed of mortgage sued upon was appellants could not have had knowledge or information
attached to the complaint as Annex "A". After having as to the truth or falsity of any of said allegations. As a
been granted an extension, the appellants filed an copy of the deed of mortgage formed part of the
answer on September 30, 1954, alleging: complaint, it was easy for and within the power of the
appellants, for instance, to determine and so specifically
1. That they admit paragraph 1 of the allege in their answer whether or not they had executed
complaint; the alleged mortgage. The appellants could be aided in
the matter by an inquiry or verification as to its
2. That the defendants are without knowledge registration in the Registry of Deeds. "An unexplained
or information sufficient to form a belief as to denial of information and belief of a matter of records,
the truth of the material averments of the the means of information concerning which are within
remainder of the complaint; and the control of the pleader, on are readily accessible to
him, is evasive and is insufficient to constitute an
effective denial. (41 Am. Juris., 399, citing Dahlstrom vs.
3. That they hereby reserve the right to present Gemunder, 92, NE 106.)
an amended answer with special defenses and
counterclaim.
It is noteworthy that the answer was filed after an
extension granted by the lower court, and that while a
As the appellants did not file any amended answer, the reservation was made to file an amended answer, no
appellee moved on November 15, 1954 for judgment on such pleading was presented. If these show anything, it
the pleadings on the ground that the answer failed to is that the appellants obviously did not have any
tender an issue. The lower court granted appellee's defense or wanted to delay the proceedings.
motion in the order dated December 28, 1954 and
thereafter (on December 29, 1954) rendered judgment
in favor of the appellee. In granting the motion for The form of denial adopted by the appellants, although
judgment on the pleadings, the lower court held "that the allowed by the Rules of Court, must be availed of with
denial by the defendants of the material allegations of sincerity and in good faith,—certainly neither for the
the complaint under the guise of lack of knowledge is a purpose of confusing the adverse party as to what
general denial so as to entitle the plaintiff to judgment on allegations of the complaint are really put in issue nor
the pleadings." for, the purpose of delay.
In the present appeal taken by the defendants, the . . . no court will permit its process to be trifled
question raised is whether the allegation of want of with and its intelligence affronted by the offer of
knowledge or information as to the truth of the material pleadings which any reasoning person knows
averments of the complaint amounts to a mere general can not possibly be true. . . ."The general rule
denial warranting judgment on the pleadings or is that the Court is not bound to accept
sufficient to tender a triable issue. statements in pleadings which are, to the
common knowledge of all intelligent persons,
untrue, applies just as well to the provisions of
Section 7 of Rule 9 of the Rules of court, in allowing the Rule 8(b), 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c,
defendant to controvert material averments not within as to pleadings under the, State statute."
his knowledge or information, provides that "where the (Nieman vs. Long, 51 F. Supp. 30, 31.)
defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient
to form a belief as to the truth of material averment, he
shall so state and this shall have the effect of a denial. This rule, specifically authorizing an answer
This form of denial was explained in one case as that defendant has no knowledge or information
follows: sufficient to form a belief his to the truth of an
averment and giving such answer is not the
effect of a denial, does not apply where the fact
Just as the explicit denials of an answer should as to which want of knowledge is asserted is to
be either general or specific, so all denials of the knowledge of the court as plainly and
knowledge or information sufficient to form a necessarily within the defendants knowledge
belief should refer either generally to all the that his averment of ignorance must be
averments of the complain" thus intended to be palpably untrue. (Icle Plant Equipment Co. vs.
denied, or specifically to such as are to be Martocello, D.C. Pa. 1941, 43 F. Supp. 281.)
denied by that particular form of plea. The
would be so definite and certain in its allegation
that the pleaders' adversary should not be left Wherefore, the decision appealed from is hereby
in doubt as to what is admitted, what is denied, affirmed with costs against the appellants. So ordered.
and what is covered by denials of knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief. Under this Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo,
form of denial employed by the defendant, it Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Endencia, and
would be difficult, if not impossible to convict Felix, JJ.,concur.
him of perjury if it should transpire that some of

GR L-9531 Warner Barnes V Reyes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GR L-9531 Warner Barnes V Reyes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GR L-9531 Warner Barnes V Reyes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EN BANC his denials of knowledge, etc.

, were false, for

You might also like