Lorbes v CA

[G.R. No. 139884. February 15, 2001]

Facts: This petition for review on certiorari arose from an action for reformation of instrument and
damages originally filed with the Regional Trial Court of Antipolo, Rizal, Branch 74, the decision on which
was reviewed and reversed by the Third Division of the Court of Appeals.
Petitioners were the registered owners of a 225-square meter parcel of land located in Antipolo, Rizal
covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 165009. Sometime in August 1991, petitioners mortgaged
this property to Florencio and Nestor Carlos in the amount of P150,000.00. About a year later, the
mortgage obligation had increased to P500,000.00 and fearing foreclosure of the property, petitioners
asked their son-in-law, herein private respondent Ricardo delos Reyes, for help in redeeming their
property. Private respondent delos Reyes agreed to redeem the property but because he allegedly had
no money then for the purpose he solicited the assistance of private respondent Josefina Cruz, a family
friend of the delos Reyes and an employee of the Land Bank of the Philippines. It was agreed that
petitioners will sign a deed of sale conveying the mortgaged property in favor of private respondent
Cruz and thereafter, Cruz will apply for a housing loan with Land Bank, using the subject property as
collateral. It was further agreed that out of the proceeds of the loan, P500,000.00 will be paid to the
Carloses as mortgagees, and any such balance will be applied by petitioners for capital gains tax,
expenses for the cancellation of the mortgage to the Carloses, transfer of title to Josefina Cruz, and
registration of a mortgage in favor of Land Bank. Moreover, the monthly amortization on the housing
loan which was supposed to be deducted from the salary of private respondent Cruz will be reimbursed
by private respondent delos Reyes.
On September 29, 1992, the Land Bank issued a letter of guarantee in favor of the Carloses, informing
them that Cruzs loan had been approved. On October 22, 1992, Transfer Certificate of Title No. 165009
was cancelled and Transfer Certificate of Title No. 229891 in the name of Josefina Cruz was issued in lieu
thereof.On November 25, 1992, the mortgage was discharged. Sometime in 1993, petitioners notified
private respondent delos Reyes that they were ready to redeem the property but the offer was refused.
Aggrieved, petitioners filed on July 22, 1994 a complaint for reformation of instrument and damages
with the RTC of Antipolo, Rizal, docketed as Civil Case No. 94-3296.

Issue: Whether the transaction was in fact an equitable mortgage as the same has been squarely raised
in the complaint and had been the subject of arguments and evidence of the parties?

Ruling: It is not the caption of the pleading but the allegations therein that determine the nature of the
action, and the Court shall grant relief warranted by the allegations and the proof even if no such relief
is prayed for.
Finally, on the award of damages. Considering the due process flaws that attended the default
judgment of the RTC, and applying the rule adopted by this Court that in instances where no actual
damages are adjudicated the awards for moral and exemplary damages may be reduced, we reduce the
award for moral damages in the instant case from P50,000.00 to P30,000.00. At the same time, we
sustain the award of attorneys fees in the amount of P50,000.00, it being clear that petitioners were
compelled to incur expenses and undergo the rigors of litigation to recover their property.
The decision of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The decision of the Regional Trial
Court of Antipolo, Rizal is REINSTATED, with the MODIFICATION that the award of moral damages is
reduced to P30,000.00, and in all other respects AFFIRMED. Costs against private respondents.
People v. Mendoza
[G.R. No. 143702. September 13, 2001]

Facts: This is an appeal from the decision, dated March 12, 1998, of the Regional Trial Court, Branch
33, Iloilo City, finding accused-appellant Zaldy Mendoza guilty of the crime of robbery with homicide and
sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs of the victim,
Hernandez Abatay, in the amounts of P75,000.00 as actual damages and P50,000.00 as civil indemnity.
The information against accused-appellant charged :That on or about the 7th day of July, 1994 in
the City of Iloilo, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Court, said accused, armed with a knife,
conspiring and confederating with Marco Aguirre who is still at large, working together and helping one
another, with deliberate intent and with violence employed upon the person of Hernandez Abatay, that
is by stabbing him with the said knife, with which the accused was armed at the time, did then and there
wilfully, unlawfully and criminally take and carry away with intent to gain one (1) Seiko Divers
wristwatch valued at P300.00 and cash of P15.00 owned by Hernandez Abatay and as a consequence of
the stab wounds suffered by Hernandez Abatay at the hands of the accused, the said Hernandez Abatay
died a few days thereafter.CONTRARY TO LAW
The information was subsequently amended to include Marco Aguirre, accused-appellant
Mendozas co-accused.The prosecution presented evidence showing the following:
On July 7, 1994, at around 1:30 a.m., the victim Hernandez Abatay and his companion Jose Neri
Tajanlangit were at the corner of Quezon and Ledesma Streets in Iloilo City waiting for a jeepney to take
them home. They had just come from work at a supermarket. Tajanlangit left Abatay to urinate
nearby. He was about 15 feet away from Abatay when he saw accused-appellant Zaldy Mendoza and a
companion approach Abatay. The two men robbed Abatay. Accused-appellants companion held Abatays
hands behind his back while accused-appellant took Abatays wrist watch and money. Accused-appellant
then stabbed Abatay in the abdomen. Abatay ran away but accused-appellant pursued him.
At that time, PO3 Danilo Tan of the PNP was going home on board a tricycle. He saw a man running
on the street, going in his direction. Tan asked the tricycle driver to stop. He alighted and asked the
person why he was running. He turned out to be Abatay. He said that he had been held up by two
persons. Tan asked him why he was clutching his stomach. Abatay replied that he had been stabbed by
the robbers. Tan found that the victim had a wound in the lower right portion of his stomach, about one
inch above his belt. Abatay told Tan that one of the robbers was wearing a white t-shirt while the other
was wearing a sleeveless basketball shirt and undershirt uniform.
PO3 Tan asked the tricycle driver to take Abatay to St. Pauls Hospital, while he went after the
suspects. He spotted one of the suspects, who was wearing a sleeveless basketball shirt, along Quezon
St. on the way to Rizal St. The suspect, who was later identified as accused-appellant Zaldy Mendoza,
was panting for breath because he had been running. Tan identified himself and searched the
suspect.Tan was able to recover a table knife from accused-appellant.
Issues: Whether appellate courts will interfere with the trial courts findings on the credibility of
witnesses? No
Whether there was an error incurred by the trial court in admitting evidence of the confession? No

Ruling: (1)We have repeatedly ruled that in the absence of any fact or circumstance of weight which has
been overlooked or the significance of which has been misconstrued, appellate courts will not interfere
with the trial courts findings on the credibility of witnesses or set aside its judgment considering that it is
in a better position to decide these questions as it heard the witnesses during trial.The matter of
assigning values to declarations on the witness stand is best and most completely performed and carried
out by a trial judge who, unlike appellate magistrates, can weigh such testimonies in the light of the
defendants behavior, demeanor, conduct, and attitude during the trial.

(2) Indeed, the confession is inadmissible in evidence under Article III, Section 12(1) and (3) of the
Constitution, because it was given under custodial investigation and was made without the assistance of
counsel. However, the defense failed to object to its presentation during the trial with the result that the
defense is deemed to have waived objection to its admissibility. No error was, therefore, incurred by the
trial court in admitting evidence of the confession. Nor did the trial court err in sentencing accused-
appellant to reclusion perpetua.The penalty for robbery with homicide under Art. 294, par. 1 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, is reclusion perpetua to death. In the absence of any
aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty should be imposed, i.e., reclusion perpetua.
The amended decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 33, Iloilo City, finding accused-appellant
Zaldy Mendoza guilty of robbery with homicide and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant is ordered to pay the heirs of the
victim P59,497.00 as actual damages and P50,00.00 as moral damages in addition to the amount
of P50,000.00 awarded as indemnity by the trial court. Costs against accused-appellant.