G.R. No. L-4624; April 18, 1952
FELIPA PACHO, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellees, vs. LUIS UY ICO, ET AL., defendants. LUIS UY ICO, appellant.

FACTS

In June 1939, plaintiffs, heirs of Mariano Suan, filed a complaint in the Court of First Instance of Misamis Occidental. They alleged that Mariano Suan, during his lifetime and while married to plaintiff Felipa Pacho, owned two parcels of land as conjugal property. In October 1932, Suan mortgaged these parcels to defendant Luis Uy Ico for P2,500, but the document was executed as a deed of sale with a right to repurchase within one year. Suan died a month later. In February 1933, defendant Procopio Jutba qualified as special administrator of Suan’s estate, with other defendants as sureties. The complaint alleged that the administrator, in connivance with Uy Ico, deliberately failed to repay the debt, and Uy Ico unlawfully consolidated ownership and retained possession, enjoying the fruits despite plaintiffs’ offers to repay. The plaintiffs prayed to be declared owners, for Uy Ico to deliver the land, and for payment of fruits and damages. On July 3, 1939, defendant Uy Ico filed an answer containing a general denial. On July 10, 1939, the other defendants also answered with a general denial. The case was pending when, on July 1, 1947, plaintiffs filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, invoking Sections 6-8, Rule 9 of the Rules of Court (effective July 1940, which abolished general denials). On September 1, 1947, the court granted the motion, declaring the transaction a mere loan and the plaintiffs as heirs the owners, ordering Uy Ico to vacate upon payment of P2,500. Uy Ico moved for reconsideration, arguing the Rules of Court did not apply to his 1939 answer, offering to file an amended answer and presenting Annex C, a “renuncia de derechos” (quitclaim) by some plaintiffs. After a hearing on Annex C, the court amended its decision, recognizing the quitclaim by Felipa Pacho and Primitiva Suan, thereby declaring Uy Ico the absolute owner of a 3/4 portion of the lots. It further declared the minor plaintiffs (Aguinaldo, Paulina, and Remedios, all surnamed Jutba, who were bound by Annex C) as owners of a 1/4 portion, ordering Uy Ico to deliver that portion upon their payment of P625 (1/4 of the debt). Luis Uy Ico appealed this decision adjudicating the 1/4 portion to the minor plaintiffs, insisting it was error to render judgment on the pleadings.

ISSUE

Whether the Rules of Court, effective July 1940 (which abolished general denials and deemed material averments admitted if not specifically denied), apply to an answer containing a general denial that was filed in July 1939, thereby justifying a judgment on the pleadings against the defendant.

RULING

No. The appealed decision is reversed. The Court held that Rule 133, which stated the new Rules would govern all further proceedings in pending cases, could not and did not operate to render improper or defective an answer that was legally acceptable at the time it was filed in July 1939. The general denial in Uy Ico’s answer was valid under the procedural rules in force when it was submitted. Therefore, it was error for the trial court to grant judgment on the pleadings based on the new Rules. The records are remanded to the court below for further proceedings, but only concerning the claim of the minor plaintiffs (Aguinaldo Jutba, Paulina Jutba, and Remedios Jutba) against Luis Uy Ico. To avoid further issues and in the interest of justice, the defendant-appellant is ordered to file, within a time fixed by the lower court, an amended answer governed by the present Rules of Court. Costs are against the appellees.