GR L 45534; (April, 1939) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-45534. April 27, 1939.
JOSEFA RIZAL MERCADO, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. ALFREDO HIDALGO RIZAL, defendant-appellee.
FACTS
The properties of the deceased Paciano Rizal y Mercado were held in usufruct by nine heirs (including plaintiffs) and in naked ownership by seven others (including defendant). For the years 1932-1934, land taxes totaling P6,503.80 were paid. The naked owners caused P1,445.29 (one-ninth of the total tax) to be deducted from the plaintiffs’ share of the fruits (produce) of the properties and applied to the tax payment, against the plaintiffs’ objection. The plaintiffs, contending that the naked owners are solely liable for the tax, sought reimbursement. All naked owners except the defendant reimbursed the plaintiffs their proportionate share (P206.47 each). Plaintiffs filed this action to compel the defendant to pay his share. The trial court sustained the defendant’s demurrer, ruling the action was premature under Article 505 of the Civil Code, which states a usufructuary who advances tax payments can recover them only upon the expiration of the usufruct.
ISSUE
Whether the action for reimbursement filed by the usufructuaries against a naked owner for taxes paid using the usufructuaries’ share of the fruits is premature under Article 505 of the Civil Code.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s order sustaining the demurrer. The Court held that the plaintiffs’ action is not based on the second paragraph of Article 505 (recovery of advanced payments at the end of usufruct) because they did not voluntarily pay or advance the tax. They objected to the payment and did not consent to the deduction from their share of the fruits. The naked owners effectively made the payment using money belonging to the plaintiffs (their share of the fruits). The plaintiffs’ cause of action is founded on the first paragraph of Article 505, which imposes the duty to pay taxes directly on the capital (the property itself) on the naked owner. Therefore, the action to recover the amount improperly taken from them to pay a liability that is not theirs is not premature. The case was remanded for further proceedings.
AI Generated by Armztrong.