Marquez v. Valencia

PARAS, J.:

A document (Exhibit B), purporting to be a pacto de retro sale of a fishpond situated in the barrio of Marulaw, municipality of Hagonoy, Bulacan, is assailed by the petitioners on the ground that it does not reflect the true agreement between the parties: antichresis. The respondent invokes the letter of the contract. Petitioner's theory was sustained by the Court of First Instance of Bulacan wherein this case was commenced.

The Court of Appeals, however, rendered a decision of reversal. Appealing by way of certiorari, the petitioners in the main argue that the Exhibit B should be held effective only as an equitable mortgage. The next following six paragraphs, taken verbatim from the decision of the Court of Appeals, contain the basic findings of fact.

(1) On December 4, 1928, the spouses Laureano Marquez and Eusebia Capiral leased to defendant Vicente Valencia, by the document Exhibit A, the herein mentioned fishpond for a period of ten years, expiring December 31, 1938. The stipulated yearly rental was P1,000, payable every month of January. Valencia held the fishpond and paid the rents for the years 1929, 1930 and 1931.

According to plaintiffs, Valencia could make a net profit of P2,000 every year. (2) Before July 31, 1931, Laureano Marquez had a litigation with Fortunato Santiago, and to settle it, he got that month seven thousand pesos (P7,000)from Vicente Valencia who did not want to give it "unless Laureano Marquez signed the document Exhibit B." Although Marquez actually received the amount of P7,000 only, the document Exhibit B listed the sum of P11,290 as purchase and repurchase price in accordance with the items written by Vicente Valencia in Exhibit C, as follows: 320 - 160 Amillaramiento x 2 8,470 - 7,000 at 10% - 700 x 2 - 1470 2,000 2,000 - mejora 500 500 por 5 meses no consumados