G.R. No. 27048 , September 27, 1927
SILVESTRA BARON, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ANSELMO SAMPANG, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Silvestra Baron, the registered owner of a parcel of land in Tarlac, leased it to Anselmo Sampang for six years at an annual rental of P800, with an option for Sampang to purchase the land for P12,000. Baron filed a complaint alleging that Sampang failed to pay the stipulated rentals, and sought rescission of the contract, delivery of possession, payment of back rentals, and damages. Sampang failed to file an answer within the reglementary period and was declared in default. After the default but before judgment was rendered, Sampang filed an unverified answer containing a general denial and a special defense alleging that he had paid rentals up to May 1925 and had tendered payment for the 1925-1926 rental and P10,000 as purchase price in May 1926, which Baron refused. He also filed a motion to set aside the default judgment and for a new trial. The trial court denied the motions, finding that Sampang failed to support his motion with an affidavit of merit showing a valid defense. Sampang appealed, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motions.

ISSUE

Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to set aside the default judgment and for a new trial?

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision. The granting or refusal of a motion to set aside a default judgment and for a new trial is largely within the discretion of the trial court. For a default judgment to be set aside, the defendant must both allege and prove that he has a meritorious defense. In this case, the lower court found that Sampang failed to make such a showing, as he did not present any receipt or evidence to prove payment of the rentals. The Supreme Court held that it could not say, as a matter of law, that there was an abuse of discretion. The judgment was affirmed, with costs against the appellant.