GR L 8752; (April, 1957) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-8752; April 29, 1957
BENITO COSA, plaintiff-appellant, vs. JUAN BAROTILLO, defendant-appellee.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Benito Cosa, filed an action to annul the marriage contract entered into by his minor daughter, Macaria Cosa, without parental consent. Macaria Cosa was born on April 10, 1937, and contracted marriage with the defendant, Juan Barotillo, on July 9, 1954, before the Justice of the Peace of Polo, Bulacan. At the time of the marriage, she was 17 years, 2 months, and 29 days old. During the hearing on December 2, 1954, Macaria Cosa testified that she was married to and cohabiting with the defendant, was two months pregnant, and did not want her marriage annulled. The Court of First Instance of Manila dismissed the complaint. The plaintiff appealed. During the appeal, the appellee filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the cause of action no longer existed because Macaria Cosa had attained the age of eighteen on April 10, 1955, and they had since freely cohabited as husband and wife, supported by a joint affidavit. The appellant objected, arguing the motion was procedurally improper, alleging the cohabitation was not free, and citing pending criminal cases against the appellee for forcible abduction and abduction with consent as disproving free cohabitation.
ISSUE
Whether the Supreme Court can consider new facts presented for the first time on appeal (via a motion to dismiss and joint affidavit alleging the minor spouse had reached majority and freely cohabited with her husband) in reviewing the judgment of the trial court.
RULING
The Supreme Court set aside the judgment appealed from and returned the case to the trial court for further proceedings. The Court held that the facts stated in the joint affidavit attached to the motion to dismiss the appeal could not be taken into consideration in reviewing the judgment because they were not passed upon by the trial court. The case was remanded to afford the appellant an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and present rebuttal evidence regarding the allegations of free cohabitation after the minor spouse attained majority.