GR 93213; (August, 1991) (Digest)
G.R. No. 93213 ; August 9, 1991
LUCIO TAN ALIM, petitioner, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS and PACIFIC COAST TIMBER PRODUCTS, INC., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Lucio Tan Alim and private respondent Pacific Coast Timber Products, Inc. entered into a Lease Contract with Option to Buy for a tractor. Upon delivery, the tractor was found defective. Alim informed the respondent and spent P36,130.60 for repairs, with respondent initially contributing P5,000. The contract was later amended, requiring Alim to execute a chattel mortgage as security. Respondent later declared Alim in default for unpaid rentals, automatically terminating the lease and option to buy. It then filed a complaint for recovery of possession with replevin. The trial court issued a writ, and the sheriff seized the tractor from Alim’s jobsite and delivered it to the respondent.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s denial of Alim’s claim for damages for unrealized income due to the seizure of the tractor.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals. The legal logic is anchored on the nature of replevin and the absence of a wrongful act by the respondent. A replevin action is designed to recover possession of personal property. The respondent, as the undisputed owner of the tractor, had the legal right to seek its recovery upon Alim’s alleged default. The seizure was effected through a court order upon the filing of a proper bond, rendering the taking legal and not irregular or illegal. Consequently, Alim cannot claim damages stemming from a lawful act. The Court further clarified that a replevin bond is intended only to indemnify the defendant for loss due to surrendering possession pending litigation, not to cover claims for unrealized business profits. For such damages to be awarded, there must be a showing that the plaintiff’s act in seizing the property was wrongful or in bad faith, which was not established. The respondent was merely enforcing its contractual and proprietary rights through judicial processes.