Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 272 views

    Tengco V Ca

    Uploaded by

    Gale Charm Señerez
    This case involves a dispute over possession of leased property between the new owner, Benjamin Cifra Jr., and the tenant, Emilia Tengco. The court held that: 1) Benjamin Cifra Jr. is the rightful owner of the property, as the trial court's finding on issues of fact will not be overturned. 2) The lessor (original owner) was not guilty of delaying acceptance of rent, as the person Tengco offered payment to no longer had authority to accept after the property transfer. 3) Laches did not prevent the ejectment, as Tengco's non-payment of rent after demand by the new owner entitled him to eject her from

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Tengco V Ca

    Uploaded by

    Gale Charm Señerez
    272 views2 pages
    This case involves a dispute over possession of leased property between the new owner, Benjamin Cifra Jr., and the tenant, Emilia Tengco. The court held that: 1) Benjamin Cifra Jr. is the rightful owner of the property, as the trial court's finding on issues of fact will not be overturned. 2) The lessor (original owner) was not guilty of delaying acceptance of rent, as the person Tengco offered payment to no longer had authority to accept after the property transfer. 3) Laches did not prevent the ejectment, as Tengco's non-payment of rent after demand by the new owner entitled him to eject her from

    Original Description:

    case digest

    Original Title

    TENGCO V CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute over possession of leased property between the new owner, Benjamin Cifra Jr., and the tenant, Emilia Tengco. The court held that: 1) Benjamin Cifra Jr. is the rightful owner of the property, as the trial court's finding on issues of fact will not be overturned. 2) The lessor (original owner) was not guilty of delaying acceptance of rent, as the person Tengco offered payment to no longer had authority to accept after the property transfer. 3) Laches did not prevent the ejectment, as Tengco's non-payment of rent after demand by the new owner entitled him to eject her from

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    272 views2 pages

    Tengco V Ca

    Uploaded by

    Gale Charm Señerez
    This case involves a dispute over possession of leased property between the new owner, Benjamin Cifra Jr., and the tenant, Emilia Tengco. The court held that: 1) Benjamin Cifra Jr. is the rightful owner of the property, as the trial court's finding on issues of fact will not be overturned. 2) The lessor (original owner) was not guilty of delaying acceptance of rent, as the person Tengco offered payment to no longer had authority to accept after the property transfer. 3) Laches did not prevent the ejectment, as Tengco's non-payment of rent after demand by the new owner entitled him to eject her from

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    TENGCO V CA

    PADILLA; October 19, 1989

    NATURE
    Review on certiorari of the decision of CA.

    FACTS
    - Lutgarda Cifra, the owner of the premises at No. 164 Int., Gov. Pascual St.,
    Navotas, Metro Manila leased the said property to Emilia Tengco. The contract was
    not in writing, hence, not recorded.
    - While the contract of lease was still subsisting, Lutgarda Cifra transferred the
    ownership of the property to Benjamin Cifra.
    - Tengco, despite her knowledge of this transfer, attempted to pay her rentals to the
    person whom she used to pay her dues. But that person refused to accept the
    payment as she is no longer had the authority to accept payments. Tengco, on the
    other hand, did not give the payment to Benjamin Cifra or consigned the amount to
    the court.
    - The record of the case shows that on 16 September 1976, Benjamin Cifra, Jr. filed
    an action for umlawful detainer with the MTC of Navotas to evict the peititioner,
    Emilia Tengco, from the said premises for her alleged failure to comply with the
    terms and conditions of the lease contract by failing and refusing to pay the
    stipulated rentals despite repeated demands. After trial, judgment was rendered
    against Tengco and ordered the defendant and any and all persons claiming rights
    under her to vacate the premises occupied by her and to surrender possession
    thereof to the plaintiff.

    ISSUES
    1. WON Benjamin Cifra, Jr. is the owner of the leased premises
    2. WON the lessor was guilty of mora accipiendi
    3. WON laches had deprived the lessor of the right to eject her considering that the
    Complaint was filed only in September 1976 whereas his cause of action arose
    sometime in February, 1974 when she defaulted in the payment of rentals

    HELD

    1. YES. The question of whether or not private respondent is the owner of the
    leased premises is one of fact which is within the cognizance of the trial court
    whose findings thereon will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is a showing
    that the trial court had overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some fact or
    circumstance of weight and substance that would have affected the result of the
    case.
    2. NO. Under the circumstances, the refusal to accept that proffered rentals is not
    without justification. The ownership of the property had been transferred by
    Lutgarda Cifra, the original lessor, to Benjamin Cifra and the person to whom
    payment was offered had no authority to accept payment. It should be noted that
    the contract of lease between the petitoner and Lutgarda Cifra, the former owner of
    the land, was not in writing and, hence, unrecorded. The Court has held that a
    contract of lease executed by the vendor, unless recorded, ceases to have effect
    when the property is sold, in the absence of a contrary agreement.
    3. NO. The tenant's mere failure to pay rent does not ipso facto make unlawful his
    possession of the leased premises. It is failure to pay rents after a demand
    therefore is made that entitles the lessor to bring an action of Unlawful Detainer,
    Moreover, the lessor has the privilege to waive his right to bring an action against
    his tenant and give the latter credit for the payment of the rents and allow him to
    continue indefinitely in the possession of the premises. During such period, the
    tenant would not be in illegal possession of the premises and the landlord can not
    maintain an action until after he has taken steps to convert the legal possession
    into an illegal possession. Consequently, petitioner's non-payment of the rentals on
    the premises, notwithstanding demand made by Cifra, and her failure to avail of the
    remedy provided for in Article 1256 of the Civil Code, entitles private respondent to
    eject her from the premises.

    Disposition: The petition is denied.

    You might also like