GR L 2622; (February, 1950) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-2622; February 28, 1950
IRINEO FACUNDO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. VALENTIN R. LIM ET AL., defendants-appellees.
FACTS
Irineo Facundo, the registered owner of a house and lot, agreed to sell the property to Hilaria Uy Isabelo for P130,000 “Philippine currency” in January 1944. A down payment was made. The subsequent deed of absolute sale, prepared by the broker, named Valentin R. Lim as the vendee and expressed the price in “lawful circulating currency.” Facundo signed this deed in February 1944 upon receipt of the balance. He later remained in the property as a tenant. After an ejectment suit was filed against him for non-payment of rent, Facundo filed an action to annul the deed of sale. He alleged he was induced to sign through fraud (misrepresentation that the deed contained the same terms as the prior agreement) and duress (due to the presence of a Japanese military officer). The trial court dismissed his complaint.
ISSUE
Whether the deed of sale should be annulled on the grounds of fraud and intimidation.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal. The evidence was insufficient to prove fraud or intimidation. Facundo, who was neither illiterate nor ignorant, could not credibly claim he signed without reading the deed, especially as his lawyer son was present. The changes in the vendee’s identity and the currency denomination (“Philippine currency” to “lawful circulating currency”) were not material inducements for Facundo, as he was primarily interested in the cash price. At the time, such currency terms were customarily understood to mean Japanese military notes, the only circulating currency, which Facundo had already accepted when he cashed the initial check. The claim of intimidation was an afterthought, not alleged in the complaints and unsupported by convincing proof. Facundo’s subsequent conduct—accepting payments, allowing debts to be paid from the proceeds, occupying the property as a tenant, and only seeking annulment after an ejectment judgment—belied his claims of vitiated consent.
AI Generated by Armztrong.