CA Agro-Industrial Corp. vs CA

CA Agro-Industrial Development Development Corp. vs CA G.R. No. 90027 Marc !" #99!

Doctrine$ Contract o% rent o% a sa%et& deposit 'o( is a special )ind o% deposit" *ic is not to 'e strictl& governed '& te provision on deposit. +acts$ ,etiti ,e titioner oner"" CA Agr Agro-Indu o-Industria striall Deve Developm lopment ent Corp" and spou spouses ses Ram Ramon on and ,a ,allia llia ,ug ,ugao ao entered into an agreement *ere'& te %ormer purcased %rom te latter t*o 2 parcels o%  land in installment 'asis. Among te terms and conditions o% te agreement *ere tat te titles to te lots sall 'e trans%erred to te petitioner upon %ull pa&ment o% te purcase price and tat te o*ner/s copies o% te certicates o% titles tereto" sall 'e deposited in a sa%et& deposit 'o( o% an& 'an). ,etitioner and te ,ugaos ten rented 1a%et& Deposit o( o%  private respondent 1ecurit& an) and 3rust Compan&.  3erea%  3erea%ter" ter" a certain Mrs. Margari Margarita ta Ramos o4ered to 'u& %rom te petitioner te t*o 2 parcels o% land. Ramos demanded te e(ecution o% a deed o% sale" *ic necessaril& entailed te production o% te certicates o%  title. tit le. In vi vie* e* te tere reo%" o%" Agu Aguir irre re"" acc accomp ompan anied ied '& te ,u ,ugao gao5s" 5s" te ten n pr proce oceede eded d to te respondent an) to open te sa%et& deposit 'o( and get te certicates o% title. 6o*ever" *en *e n ope opened ned in te pr prese esence nce o% te an an)/s )/s re repr prese esenta ntativ tive" e" te 'o 'o( ( &i &ield elded ed no suc suc  certicates. Mrs. Ramos *itdre* er o4er and conseuence tereo%" petitioner allegedl& %ailed to reali8e te prot prompting tem to le %or complaint against te respondent.  3e R3C R3C ruled in %avor o% te respondent 'an). 3e CA armed te assailed assailed decision on te ground tat te contract e(ecuted '& te petitioner and te 'an) is a contract o% lease" tus te 'an) as neiter possession nor control over te contents o% te sa%et& deposit 'o(. 6ence" tis present petition. Issue$ :;N te contract entered into '& Ca-Agro Ca-Agro Industrial Development Corp. and 1ecurit& an) and 3rust Compan& is a contract o% rent. Ruling$ No" te 1C eld tat te contract %or te rent o% te sa%et& deposit 'o( e(ecuted '& te parties is not an ordinar& contract o% lease as dened in Article #oint renters - te petitioner and te ,ugaos. 3e guard )e& o% te 'o( remained *it te respondent an)? *itout tis )e&" neiter o% te renters could open te 'o(. ;n te oter and" te respondent an) could not li)e*ise open te 'o( *itout te renter/s )e&.