Professional Documents
Culture Documents
*
G.R. No. 156132. October 16, 2006.
_______________
* FIRST DIVISION.
379
not go into the details of the appealed case. Without any particular
idea as to the assignments of error or the relief respondent intended
to seek from this Court, in light of her failure to file her Petition for
Review, there is actually no second case involving the same parties,
rights or causes of action, and relief sought, as that in CA-G.R. CV
No. 51930.
been filed or is pending, she shall report that fact within five days
therefrom to this Court. Without her Petition for Review,
respondent had no obligation to execute and submit the foregoing
Certification against Forum Shopping. Thus, respondent did not
violate Rule 7, Section 5 of the Revised Rules of Court; neither did
she mislead this Court as to the pendency of another similar case.
380
appellee; (7) when the findings are contrary to those of the trial
court; (8) when the findings are conclusions without citation of
specific evidence on which they are based; (9) when the facts set
forth in the petition as well as in the petitionerÊs main and reply
briefs are not disputed by the respondent; and (10) when the
findings of fact are premised on the supposed absence of evidence
and contradicted by the evidence on record.
Judges; That the trial court judge who decided a case is not the
same judge who heard the case and received the evidence is of little
consequence when the records and transcripts of stenographic notes
(TSNs) are complete and available for consideration by the former.
381
382
PNs No. 23356 and 23357 are uncontested, respondent was able to
establish prima facie that petitioner Citibank is liable to her for the
amounts stated therein. The assertion of petitioner Citibank of
payment of the said PNs is an affirmative allegation of a new
matter, the burden of proof as to such resting on petitioner
Citibank. Respondent having proved the existence of the obligation,
the burden of proof was upon petitioner Citibank to show that it
had been discharged. It has already been established by this Court
that·As a general rule, one who pleads payment has the burden of
proving it. Even where the plaintiff must allege non-payment, the
general rule is that the burden rests on the defendant to prove
payment, rather than on the plaintiff to prove non-payment. The
debtor has the burden of showing with legal certainty that the
obligation has been discharged by payment. When the existence of a
debt is fully established by the evidence contained in the record, the
burden of proving that it has been extinguished by payment
devolves upon the debtor who offers such defense to the claim of the
creditor. Where the debtor introduces some evidence of payment,
the burden of going forward with the evidence·as distinct from the
general burden of proof·shifts to the creditor, who is then under
the duty of producing some evidence of non-payment.
383
384
385
386
have involved not only petitioner Citibank, but also BPI, which
accepted the checks for deposit, and the Central Bank of the
Philippines, which cleared the checks. It falls upon the respondent
to overcome or dispute the presumption that the crossed checks
were issued, accepted for deposit, cleared, and paid for by the banks
involved following the ordinary course of their business. The mere
fact that MCs No. 220701 and 226467 do not bear respondentÊs
387
388
389
Same; A basic rule of evidence states that „evidence that one did
or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove
that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time,
but it may be received to prove a specific intent or knowledge,
identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the
like.‰·While the Court of Appeals can take judicial notice of the
Decision of its Third Division in the Dy case, it should not have
given the said case much weight when it rendered the assailed
Decision, since the former does not constitute a precedent. The
Court of Appeals, in the challenged Decision, did not apply any
legal argument or principle established in the Dy case but, rather,
adopted the findings therein of wrongdoing or misconduct on the
part of herein petitioner Citibank and Mr. Tan. Any finding of
wrongdoing or misconduct as against herein petitioners should be
390
391
[1986]).
392
393
394
ered, this Court has also recognized exceptions to the general rule,
wherein it authorized the review of matters, even those not
assigned as errors in the appeal, if the consideration thereof is
necessary in arriving at a just decision of the case, and there is a
close interrelation between the omitted assignment of error and
those actually assigned and discussed by the appellant. Thus, the
Court of Appeals did not err in awarding the damages when it
already made findings that would justify and support the said
award.
395
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
1
Before this Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari,
under Rule
2
45 of the Revised Rules of Court, of the
Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV3 No. 51930,
dated 26 March 2002, and the Resolution, dated 20
_______________
396
_______________
397
_______________
398
_______________
RTC), the case was transferred to Makati RTC, Branch 57, presided
by Judge Francisco X. Velez, for reasons not disclosed in the Records.
Judge Velez was able to try and hear the case until the presentation of
the evidence by herein petitioners (defendants before the RTC).
Respondent again took the stand to present rebuttal evidence, but even
before she could finish her testimony, Judge Velez inhibited himself upon
petitionersÊ motion (Order, dated 10 April 1992, penned by Judge
Francisco X. Velez, Records, Vol. 11, p. 1085). The case was transferred to
Makati RTC, Branch 141, presided by Judge Marcelino F. Bautista, Jr.
For reasons not disclosed in the Records, Judge Manuel D. Victorio took
over Makati RTC, Branch 141. After the parties submitted their
respective Memoranda, Judge Victorio declared the case submitted for
decision (Order, dated 9 December 1994, penned by Judge Manuel D.
Victorio, Records, Vol. III, p. 1602). Judge Victorio rendered his Decision
in Civil Case No. 11336 on 24 August 1995 (Records, Vol. III, pp. 1607-
1621).
399
_______________
400
401
_______________
402
_______________
16 Rollo, p. 374.
17 Resolution, dated 29 January 2003; Rollo, pp. 980-A-B.
18 Resolution, dated 23 June 2003; Id., at pp. 1311-1312.
403
404
_______________
405
_______________
21 See the case of Borromeo v. Court of Appeals (162 Phil. 430, 438; 70
SCRA 329 [1976]) wherein this Court pronounced that a partyÊs right to
appeal shall not be affected by the perfection of another appeal from the
same decision; otherwise, it would lead to the absurd proposition that
one party may be deprived of the right to appeal from the portion of a
decision against him just because the other party who had been notified
of the decision ahead had already perfected his appeal in so far as the
said decision adversely affects him. If the perfection of an appeal by one
party would not bar the right of the other party to appeal from the same
decision, then an unperfected appeal, as in the case at bar, would have
far less effect.
406
22
purpose of obtaining a favorable judgment. The test for
determining forum shopping is whether in the two (or
more) cases pending, there is an identity
23
of parties, rights
or causes of action, and relief sought. To guard against
this deplorable practice, Rule 7, Section 5 of the revised
Rules of Court imposes the following requirement·
_______________
22 The Executive Secretary v. Gordon, 359 Phil. 266, 271; 298 SCRA
736, 740 (1998).
23 Young v. John Keng Seng, 446 Phil. 823, 833; 398 SCRA 629, 638
(2003).
407
408
409
II
_______________
24 Sps. Sta. Maria v. Court of Appeals, 349 Phil. 275, 282-283; 285
SCRA 351, 357-358 (1998).
25 The Court of Appeals modified the trial courtÊs findings and
conclusions, as follows: (1) By declaring the P1,069,847.40 alleged
indebtedness of Ms. Sabeniano as non-existing for failure of Citibank
410
The fact that the trial judge who rendered the RTC Decision
in Civil Case No. 11336, dated 24 August 1995, was not the
same judge who heard and tried the case, does not, by itself,
render the said Decision erroneous.
The Decision in Civil Case No. 11336 was rendered more
than 10 years from the institution of the said case. In the
course of its trial, the26case was presided over by four (4)
different RTC judges. It was Judge Victorio, the fourth
judge assigned to the case, who wrote the 27
RTC Decision,
dated 24 August 1995. In his Decision, Judge Victorio
made the following findings·
_______________
411
_______________
412
_______________
413
414
415
Deposit/Placement Amount
Dollar deposit with Citibank-Geneva $
149,632.99
Money market placement with Citibank,
evidenced
by Promissory Note (PN) No. 23356 (which
cancels
and supersedes PN No. 22526), earning
14.5% P
interest per annum (p.a.) 318,897.34
Money market placement with Citibank,
evidenced by
PN No. 23357 (which cancels and supersedes
PN No. 22528), P
earning 14.5% interest p.a. 203,150.00
Money market placement with FNCB
Finance, evidenced
by PN No. 5757 (which cancels and
supersedes PN No. 4952), P
earning 17% interest p.a. 500,000.00
Money market placement with FNCB
Finance, evidenced
by PN No. 5758 (which cancels and
supersedes PN No. 2962), P
earning 17% interest p.a. 500,000.00
416
_______________
417
418
„As a general rule, one who pleads payment has the burden of
proving it. Even where the plaintiff must allege non-payment, the
general rule is that the burden rests on the defendant to prove
payment, rather than on the plaintiff to prove non-payment. The
debtor has the burden of showing with legal certainty that the
obligation has been discharged by payment.
When the existence of a debt is fully established by the evidence
contained in the record, the burden of proving that it has been
extinguished by payment devolves upon the debtor who offers such
defense to the claim of the creditor. Where the debtor introduces
some evidence of payment, the burden of going forward with the
evidence·as distinct from the general burden of proof·shifts to
the creditor, who is then under the duty of producing some evidence
34
of non-payment.‰
35
Mr. Herminio Pujeda, the officer-in-charge of loans and
placements at the time when the questioned transactions
took
_______________
419
Atty. Mabasa:
Okey [sic]. Now Mr. Witness, you were asked to testify
in this case and this case is [sic] consist [sic] of several
documents involving transactions between the plaintiff
and the defendant. Now, were you able to make your
own memorandum regarding all these transactions?
A Yes, based on my recollection of these facts, I did come
up of [sic] the outline of the chronological sequence of
events.
Court:
Are you trying to say that you have personal knowledge
or participation to these transactions?
A Yes, your Honor, I was the officer-in charge of the unit
that was processing these transactions. Some of the
documents bear my signature.
Court:
And this resume or summary that you have prepared is
based on purely your recollection or documents?
A Based on documents, your Honor.
Court:
Are these documents still available now?
A Yes, your honor.
Court:
Better present the documents.
Atty. Mabasa:
Yes, your Honor, that is why your Honor.
_______________
36 Mr. Francisco Tan, at the time of his deposition in 1990, was already
working as Assistant General Manager for Dai-Chi Kangyo Bank in
Hong Kong.
37 TSN, 12 March 1990, pp. 6-10.
420
Atty. Mabasa:
Q Now, basing on the notes that you prepared, Mr. Witness, and
according to you basing also on your personal recollection about
all the transactions involved between Modesta Sabeniano and
defendant City Bank [sic] in this case. Now, would you tell us
what happened to the money market placements of Modesta
Sabeniano that you have earlier identified in Exhs. „47‰ and
„48‰?
A The transactions which I said earlier were terminated and
booked to time deposits.
Q And you are saying time deposits with what bank?
A With First National Citibank.
Q Is it the same bank as Citibank, N.A.?
A Yes, sir.
Q And how much was the amount booked as time deposit with
defendant Citibank?
A In the amount of P500,000.00.
Q And outside this P500,000.00 which you said was booked out of
the proceeds of Exhs. „47‰ and „48,‰ were there other time
deposits opened by Mrs. Modesta Sabeniano at that time.
A Yes, she also opened another time deposit for P600,000.00.
Q So all in all Mr. Witness, sometime in April of 1978 Mrs.
Modesta Sabeneano [sic] had time deposit placements with
Citibank in the amount of P500,000.00 which is the proceeds of
Exhs. „47‰ and „48‰ and another P600,000.00, is it not?
A Yes, sir.
Q And would you know where did the other P600,000 placed by
Mrs. Sabeneano [sic] in a time deposit with Citibank, N.A. came
[sic] from?
A She funded it directly.
Q What are you saying Mr. Witness is that the P600,000 is a [sic]
fresh money coming from Mrs. Modesta Sabeneano [sic]?
A That is right.
421
Atty. Mabasa: Now from the Exhibits that you have identified Mr.
Tan from Exhibits „A‰ to „F,‰ which are Exhibits of the plaintiff.
Now, do I understand from you that the original amount is Five
Hundred Thousand and thereafter renewed in the succeeding
exhibits?
Mr. Tan: Yes, Sir.
Atty. Mabasa: Alright, after these Exhibits „E‰ and „F‰ matured,
what happened thereafter?
Mr. Tan: Split into two time deposits.
Atty. Mabasa: Exhibits „E‰ and „F‰?
_______________
38 Lichauco v. Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co., 84 Phil. 330, 346 (1949).
422
from among all the clients they had dealt with and all the
transactions they had processed as officers of petitioner
Citibank, they specially remembered respondent and her
PNs No. 23356 and 23357. Their testimonies likewise
lacked details on the circumstances surrounding the
payment of the two PNs and the opening of the time
deposit accounts by respondent, such as the date of
payment of the two PNs, mode of payment, and the manner
and context by which respondent relayed her instructions
to the officers of petitioner Citibank to use the proceeds of
her two PNs in opening the TD accounts.
_______________
423
424
_______________
425
_______________
426
_______________
427
_______________
428
_______________
429
430
III
Description Amount
Principal and interests of PNs No. 20138
and 20139
(money market placements with petitioner P
FNCB Finance) 1,022,916.66
Savings account with petitioner Citibank 31,079.14
Dollar remittance from Citibank-Geneva
431
(peso equivalent
Of US$149,632.99) 1,102,944.78
Total P 2,156,940.58
_______________
432
Sabeniano
All the PNs stated that the purpose of the loans covered
thereby is „To liquidate existing obligation,‰ except for PN
No. 34534, which stated for its purpose „personal
investment.‰ Respondent secured her foregoing loans with
petitioner Citibank by executing Deeds of Assignment of
her money market placements with petitioner FNCB
Finance. On 2 March 1978, respondent executed
57
in favor of
petitioner Citibank a Deed of Assignment of PN No. 8169,
which was issued by petitioner FNCB Finance, to secure
payment of the credit and banking facilities extended to
her by petitioner Citibank, in the aggregate principal
amount of P500,000.00. On 9 March 1978, respondent
executed in favor of petitioner
_______________
433
_______________
434
_______________
435
_______________
436
_______________
437
_______________
438
_______________
439
_______________
440
Sabeniano
_______________
441
_______________
77 TSN, 7 May 1986, Vol. II, pp. 42-52; TSN, 19 May 1986, Vol. II, pp.
3-28.
78 Sarmiento v. Court of Appeals, 364 Phil. 613, 621; 305 SCRA 138,
146 (1999).
442
_______________
443
_______________
444
_______________
445
_______________
446
_______________
447
_______________
448
Sabeniano
_______________
95 Exhibits „GGG‰ and „JJJ,‰ plaintiff Ês folder of exhibits, pp. 109, 113.
96 Plaintiff Ês folder of exhibits, p. 110.
97 See the initials on Exhibit „III-1,‰ plaintiff Ês folder of exhibits, p.
112.
449
_______________
450
451
_______________
452
_______________
453
454
_______________
105 TSN, deposition of Mr. Francisco A. Tan, 3 September 1990, pp. 13-
16.
106 TSN, 22 May 1990, Vol. V, pp. 31-61.
107 TSN, 7 March 1991, Vol. IX, pp. 15-19; TSN, 13 March 1991, Vol. X,
pp. 7-9.
455
_______________
108 TSN, 19 March 1991, Vol. X, pp. 17-21; TSN, 8 April 1991, Vol. X,
pp. 31-34.
456
_______________
457
_______________
458
The best evidence rule has been made part of the revised
Rules of Court, Rule 130, Section 3, which reads·
459
„It is true that the Court relied not upon the original but only copy
of the Angara Diary as published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer
on February 4-6, 2001. In doing so, the Court, did not, however,
violate the best evidence rule. Wigmore, in his book on evidence,
states that:
„Production of the original may be dispensed with, in the trial
courtÊs discretion, whenever in the case in hand the opponent does
not bona fide dispute the contents of the document and no other
useful purpose will be served by requiring production.24
„x x x x
„In several Canadian provinces, the principle of unavailability
has been abandoned, for certain documents in which ordinarily no
real dispute arised. This measure is a sensible and progressive one
and deserves universal adoption (post, sec. 1233). Its essential
feature is that a copy may be used unconditionally, if the opponent
has been given an opportunity to inspect it.‰ (Emphasis supplied.)
This Court did not violate the best evidence rule when it
considered and weighed in evidence the photocopies and
microfilm copies of the PNs, MCs, and letters submitted by
the petitioners to establish the existence of respondentÊs
loans. The terms or contents of these documents were
never the point of contention in the Petition at bar. It was
respondentÊs position that the PNs in the first set (with the
exception of PN No. 34534) never existed, while the PNs in
the second set (again, excluding PN No. 34534) were
merely executed to cover simulated loan transactions. As
for the MCs representing the proceeds of the loans, the
respondent either denied receipt of certain MCs or
admitted receipt of the other MCs
_______________
115 F.D. Regalado, REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM, Vol. II, 571 (8th
ed., 2000).
116 G.R. Nos. 146710-15, 3 April 2001, 356 SCRA 108, 137-138.
460
_______________
461
_______________
462
_______________
463
464
„The rule is founded upon reason, public policy, justice and judicial
convenience. The fact that a person has committed the same or
similar acts at some prior time affords, as a general rule, no logical
guaranty that he committed the act in question. This is so because,
subjectively, a manÊs mind and even his modes of life may change;
and, objectively, the conditions under which he may find himself at
a given time may likewise change and thus induce him to act in a
different way. Besides, if evidence of similar acts are to be
invariably admitted, they will give rise to a multiplicity of collateral
issues and will subject the defendant to surprise as well as confuse
121
the court and prolong the trial.‰
_______________
465
IV
(1) That each one of the obligors be bound principally, and that
he be at the same time a principal creditor of the other;
(2) That both debts consist in a sum of money, or if the things
due are consumable, they be of the same kind, and also of
the same quality if the latter has been stated;
(3) That the two debts be due;
(4) That they be liquidated and demandable;
(5) That over neither of them there be any retention or
controversy, commenced by third persons and
communicated in due time to the debtor.
466
_______________
122 CIVIL CODE, Article 1980; Guingona, Jr. v. City Fiscal of Manila,
213 Phil. 516, 523-524; 128 SCRA 577, 584 (1984).
123 CIVIL CODE, Article 1286.
467
Sabeniano
468
_______________
124 G.R. No. 57092, 21 January 1993, 217 SCRA 307, 313-314.
469
follows:
xxxx
_______________
470
_______________
471
_______________
131 Wildvalley Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Court of Appeals, 396 Phil. 383,
396; 342 SCRA 213, 223 (2000).
472
_______________
473
134
dated. Since it is undeniable that respondent was out of
the country on 24 September 1979, then she could not have
executed the pledge on the said date.
Third, the Declaration of Pledge was irregularly filled-
out. The pledge was in a standard printed form. It was
constituted in favor of Citibank, N.A., otherwise referred to
therein as the Bank. It should be noted, however, that in
the space which should have named the pledgor, the name
of petitioner Citibank was typewritten, to wit·
„The pledge right herewith constituted shall secure all claims which
the Bank now has or in the future acquires against Citibank, N.A.,
Manila (full name and address of the Debtor), regardless of the
legal cause or the transaction (for example current account,
securities transactions, collections, credits, payments, documentary
credits and collections) which gives rise thereto, and including
principal, all contractual and penalty interest, commissions,
charges, and costs.‰
„Basic is the rule of evidence that when the subject of inquiry is the
contents of a document, no evidence is admissible other than
_______________
474
_______________
135 Heirs of Severa P. Gregorio v. Court of Appeals, 360 Phil. 753, 763;
300 SCRA 565, 574 (1998).
136 Order, dated 12 November 1985, penned by Judge Ansberto P.
Paredes, Records, Vol. I, p. 310; Order, dated 2 September 1988, Id. and
penned by Judge Francisco X. Velez, Records, Vol. I, p. 449; Order, dated
24 November 1988, penned by Judge Francisco X. Velez, Records, Vol. I,
p. 458; Order, dated 25 April 1989, penned by Judge Francisco X. Velez,
Records, Vol. I, pp. 476-477.
475
_______________
137 Security Bank & Trust Co. v. Triumph Lumber and Construction
Corporation, 361 Phil. 463, 477; 301 SCRA 537, 550 (1999).
138 REVISED RULES OF COURT, Rule 131, Section 3(e).
476
_______________
139 The stipulated interest shall apply as indemnity for the damages
incurred in the delay of payment as provided in Article 2209 of the CIVIL
CODE which reads·
ART. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the
debtor incurs delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to
the contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the
absence of a stipulation, the legal interest, which is six percent per annum.
[Emphasis supplied.]
Note, however, that the legal interest has been increased from six
percent to twelve percent per annum by virtue of Central Bank Circulars
No. 416, dated 29 July 1974, and No. 905, dated 10 December 1982.
477
VI
_______________
478
_______________
479
Q By the way Mrs. Witness will you kindly tell us again, you said
before that you are a businesswoman, will you tell us again
what are the businesses you are engaged into [sic]?
A I am engaged in real estate. I am the owner of the Modesta
Village 1 and 2 in San Mateo, Rizal. I am also the President and
Chairman of the Board of Macador [sic] Co. and Business Inc.
which operates the Macador [sic] International Palace Hotel. I
am also the President of the Macador [sic] International Palace
Hotel, and also the Treasures Home Industries, Inc. which I am
the Chairm an and president of the Board and also operating
affiliated company in the name of Treasures Motor Sales
engaged in car dealers [sic] like Delta Motors, we are the
dealers of the whole Northern Luzon and I am the president of
the Disto Company, Ltd., based in Hongkong licensed in
Honkong [sic] and now operating in Los Angeles, California.
Q What is the business of that Disto Company Ltd.?
480
481
the 145
actual injury suffered by the respondent, not to enrich
her.
Having failed to exercise more care and prudence than a
private individual in its dealings with respondent,
petitioner Citibank should be liable for exemplary
damages, in 146
the amount147of P250,000.00, in accordance with
Article 2229 and 2234 of the Civil Code.
With the award of exemplary damages, then respondent 148
shall also be entitled to an award of attorneyÊs fees.
Additionally, attorney's fees may be awarded when a party
is compelled to litigate or to incur expenses to protect his149
interest by reason of an unjustified act of the other party.
In this case, an award of P200,000.00 attorneyÊs fees shall
be satisfactory.
In contrast, this Court finds no sufficient basis to award
damages to petitioners. Respondent was compelled to
institute the present case in the exercise of her rights and
in the protection of her interests. In fact, although her
Complaint before the RTC was not sustained in its entirety,
it did raise meritorious points and on which this Court
_______________
145 Tiongco v. Atty. Deguma, 375 Phil. 978, 994-995; 317 SCRA 527,
541 (1999); Zenith Insurance Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
85296, 14 May 1990, 185 SCRA 398, 402-403.
146 Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example
or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate,
liquidated or compensatory damages.
147 While the amount of exemplary damages need not be proved, the
plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or
compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of
whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded. x x x
148 CIVIL CODE, Article 2208(1).
149 Ching Sen Ben vs. Court of Appeals, 373 Phil. 544, 555; 314 SCRA
762, 772-773 (1999).
150 ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 361 Phil.
498, 531-532; 301 SCRA 572, 604 (1999); Tierra International
Construction Corp. v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R.
482
_______________
No. 88912, 3 July 1992, 211 SCRA 73, 81; Saba v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 77950, 24 August 1990, 189 SCRA 50, 55.
483
SO ORDERED.
··o0o··
484