Tan Shuy v. Maulawin

EVIDENCE | B2015 CASE DIGESTS

1. Tan Shuy Shuy [petition [petitioner] er] is engage engaged d in the busine business ss of  buying copra and corn in the 4th district of Quezon Province. a. According to his son, Vicente Tan, whenever they they woul would d buy buy copr copra a or corn corn from from crop crop sell seller ers, s, they they woul would d prep prepar are e and and issu issue e a  pesada1 in their favor. b. When a pesada contained the annotation “pd” on the total amount of the purchase price, it meant meant that that the crop delive delivered red had alread already y been paid for by Tan Shuy. 2. Guil Guille lerm rmo o Maul Maulaw awin in [res [respo pond nden ent] t] is a farm farmer er-businessm businessman an engaged engaged in buying and selling copra and corn. 3. On July July 10, 1997, 1997, Tan Shuy extended extended a loan of P420K  P420K  to Guille Guillerm rmo. o. In consid considera eratio tion n thereo thereof, f, Guille Guillermo rmo obligated himself to pay the loan and to sell lucad or copra to petitioner. Below is a a reproduction of the contract:

TAN SHUY V. MAULAWIN February 8, 2012 Sereno, J. Rañeses, Roberto Miguel O.

SUMMARY:  Tan Shuy extended a loan to Guillermo Maulawin. Eventually, Maulawin failed to pay, arguing that the loan had already been paid in full and that the net proc procee eeds ds of such such deli delive veri ries es had had been been appl applie ied d as inst instal allm lmen entt paym paymen ents ts for for the the loan loan.. The The RTC RTC rule ruled d in Guil Guille lerm rmo’ o’s s favo favor, r, givi giving ng cred creden ence ce to the the  pesadas (receipts) that were issued by Tan Shuy and offered as eviden evidence ce by Maulaw Maulawin. in. Accordi According ng to the RTC, RTC, since since the  pesadas did not contain the notation “pd,” which would have have shown shown that that such such actual actual payment payment had been made made regarding regarding the copra deliveries, deliveries, they amount representi representing ng such deliveries should be applied as loan payments. The CA affirmed the finding of the RTC. The SC affirmed. With rega regard rd to the the issu issue e of the the  pesadas admissibil admissibility ity as a private document, the SC said that, pursuant to Sec. 20 of  Rule 132, the authenticity and due execution of  pesadas have been sufficiently shown. DOCTRINE: SEC. 20. Proof of private document . – Before any private document offered as authentic is received in eviden evidence, ce, its due executi execution on and authen authentic ticity ity must must be proved either: (a) By anyone anyone who saw the docume document nt execute executed d or written; or (b) By evidence evidence of the genuineness genuineness of the signature signature or or handwriting of the maker. Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be. (21 a)

o

N 2567

Lopez, Quezon

July 10, 1997

Tinanggap ko kay G. TAN SHUY ang halagang ...................................................................... (P420,000.00) salaping Filipino. Inaako ko na isusulit isusulit sa kanya ang aking LUCAD at babayaran ko ang nasabing nasabing halaga. Kung hindi ako makasulit ng LUCAD o makabayad bago sumapit ang ........................., 19 ...... maaari niya akong ibigay sa may kapangyarihan. Kung ang pagsisingilan ay makakarating makakarating sa Juzgado ay sinasagutan ko ang lahat ng kaniyang gugol. [Sgd. by respondent] P........................................... ........................................... Lagda

4. The transa transacti ctions ons between between Tan Shuy and Guiller Guillermo mo were coursed through Tan Shuy’s daughter Elena. a. She serv served ed as cashie cashierr in the busine business ss of Tan Tan Shuy, who primarily primarily prepared prepared and issued the  pesada. b. When When she’s she’s absent, absent, Vicent Vicente e would would issue issue the  pesada.

FACTS: 1

A pesada is a document containing details of the transaction, including the date of sale, the weight of the crop delivered, the trucking cost, and the net price of the crop.

EVIDENCE | B2015 CASE DIGESTS

i. Vicente also helped Tan Shuy in buying copra and granting loans to customers [copra sellers]. 1. According to him, part of their agreementpart of their agreement with Guillermo was that they would put the annotation “sulong” on the  pesada when partial payment on the loan had been made. 5. Despite repeated demands, Guillermo remitted only P23k in August 1998 and P5.5k in October 1998, or a total of P28.5K. 6. Claiming that Maulawin had an outstanding balance of P391.5K and convinced that he no longer had any intention to pay, Ran Shuy went to the Lupon Tagapamayapa. a. Failing to reach a settlement, he filed a complaint before the RTC. Maulawin’s Arguments: 1. Loan had already been paid in full. 2. He continuously delivered and sold copra to petitioner from April 1998 to April 1999. a. An oral arrangement that the net proceeds thereof shall be applied as installment payments for the loan was made. b. His deliveries amounted to P420,537.68 worth of copra. 3. To bolster his claim, he presented copies of pesadas issued by Elena and Vicente. a. The  pesadas did not contain the notation "pd," which meant that actual payment of the net proceeds from copra deliveries was not given to him, but was instead applied as loan payment. 4. Tan Shuy filed a complaint because he got angry when Maulawin sold copra to other copra buyers.

1. The net proceeds from Guillermo's copra deliveries represented in the  pesadas, which did not bear the notation "pd" - should be applied as installment payments for the loan. 2. Gave cre de nce t o t he  pesadas, as their due execution and authenticity was established by Elena and Vicente [Tan Shuy’s children]. 3. The RTC did not credit the net proceeds from 12  pesadas, as they were deliveries for corn and not copra. a. Guillermo testified that it was the net proceeds from the copra deliveries to be applied as installment payment for the loan. b. Thus, P41,585.25, which corresponded to the net proceeds from corn deliveries, should be deducted from the amount of P420,537.68 claimed by Guillermo to be the total value of  his copra deliveries. 4. There exists, therefore, a balance of P41,047.57 in Guillermo’s loan. Ruling of the CA: Affirmed the RTC; denied Tan Shuy’s MR. 1. Tan Shuy could have easily belied the existence of  the  pesadas and the purpose for which they were offered in evidence by presenting Elena [his daughter] as witness. However, he failed to do so. 2. This failure allowed the CA to give credence to Guillermo’s testimony in that the net proceeds from the copra deliveries were applied as installment payments for the loan. ISSUE: 1. WON the  pesadas require authentication before they can be admitted in evidence. 2. WON the delivery of copra amounted to installment payments for the loan obtained by Guillermo from  Tan Shuy. RULING:

Ruling of the RTC:

EVIDENCE | B2015 CASE DIGESTS

1. Yes, BUT the authenticity and due execution of the pesadashave already been established. RATIO: 1. Tan Shuy’s Arguments: a. The  pesadas should not have been admitted since they were private documents that were not authenticated. b. The  pesadas were fabricated in order to show that the goods delivered were copra and not corn. c. Five of the  pesadasmentioned in the Formal Offer of Evidence of Guillermo were not actually offered. Supreme Court Ruling: a. According to Rule 132, Sec. 20, there are two ways of proving the exe cution and authenticity of a private document2. a. The RTC found that due execution and authenticity of the  pesadas were established by Eena Tan and sometimes by Vicente Tan. i. On cross-examination, Vicente reiterated that Elena acted as the cashier, and that Elena issued such. ii. He confirmed the penmanship and handwriting of his sister who acted as cashier. iii. He was even made to compare Xerox copies of the 2

SEC. 20. Proof of private document. – Before any private document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved either: (a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written; or (b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker. Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be. (21a)

 pesadaswith the original copies and affirmed that they are faithful reproductions. b. Tan Shuy is estopped from questioning the due execution and authenticity of the  pesadas. 2. Tan Shuy’s Arguments: a. Guillermo undertook two separate obligations: i. Pay for the loan in cash ii. Sell lucad or copra. b. Since the writt en agree ment did not specifically provide for the application of the net proceeds from the deliveries for the loan,  Tan Shuy argues that he cannot be compelled to accept copra as payment for the loan. i. The  pesadas did not specifically indicate that the net proceeds from the copra deliveris were to be used as installment payments for the loan. c. Guillermo’s copra deliveries were duly paid in cash. d. The  pesadas were in fact documentary receipts for those payments. Supreme Court Ruling: a. Pursuant to  Art. 1232 of the Civil Code, an obligation is extinguished by payment or performance. There is payment when there is delivery of money or performance of an obligation. b.  Art. 1245 provides for a special mode of  payment known as dation in payment . a. Dation in payment  extinguishes the obligation to the extent of the value of  the thing delivered, either as agreed upon by the parties or as may be proved, unless the parties by agreement – express or implied, or by their silence – consider the thing as

EVIDENCE | B2015 CASE DIGESTS

equivalent to the obligation, in which case t he obligation is totally extinguished. c. In this regard, the RTC made the following findings: a. Pesadas from April 1998 to April 1999 shows that Guillermo only gets the payments for trucking while the total amount which represent the total purchase price for the copras that he delivered to the plaintiff were all given to Elena Tan Shuy as installments for the loan he owed to plaintiff. i. Such claim was bolstered by the testimony of Apolinario Cariño which affirmed that he also sold copras to the plaintiff   Tan Shuy. ii. Guillermo also said that he incurred indebtedness to Tan Shuy and whenever he delivered copras the amount of  the copras sold were applied as payments to his loan. d. The CA fully subscribed to the findings of the RTC. e. The subsequent arrangement between Tan Shuy and Guillermo can thus be considered as one in the nature of dation in payment. There was partial payment every time Guillermo delivered copra to Tan Shuy, chose not to collect the net proceeds of his copra deliveries, and instead applied the collectible as installment payments for his loan from Tan Shuy. DISPOSITIVE: WHEREFORE the Petition is DENIED. The 31  July 2009 Decision and 13 November 2 009 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 90070 are hereby AFFIRMED.