G.R. No. 152529 - SPS. HENDRIK BIESTERBOS AND ALICIA S. BIESTERBOS, VS. HON. COURT OF APPEALS AND EFREN E. BARTOLOME.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed of the Honorable Court, after due notice and hearing to render judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants, ordering the defendants jointly and severally to: "1. Comply with their obligations and pay unto the plaintiff the following: "a. P556,691.76 representing the balance unpaid arising out of the contract to sell plus interest until fully paid; "b. P158,716.16 representing losses/damages actually incurred and paid to the bank; "c. P2,900.00 representing the cost of transfer of the other lot plus P3,000.00 representing maintenance cost and caretaker of the duplex house and lot; "d. P100,000.00 as moral damages; P100,000.00 as exemplary damages; "e. P100,000.00 as attorney's fees plus P500.00 every hearing as appearance fees; and "f. P20,000.00 as litigation expenses plus the cost of this suit. "2. Plaintiff further prays for such reliefs just and equitable in the premises." [4] In their answer, petitioners contended that respondent had failed to comply with his obligations in accordance with the contract to sell such as, among other things, the immediate transfer of possession of the property and the construction and installation of a driveway. Petitioners also asserted that Alicia Biesterbos had paid respondent the following amounts even after the agreed period of 30 July 1992, to wit: "1) 17 April 1992 P 972,486.80 "2) 30 July 1992 P 319,612.65 "3) 11 September 1992 P 348,849.43 "4) 10 October 1992 P 355,259.36 "5) 09 February1993 P 50,000.00 "6) 23 March 1993 P 10,000.00 "7) 30 March 1993 P 30,000.00 "8) 06 April 1993 P 5,000.00 "Total Payments Made P2,081,208.24" [5] Petitioners claimed that the deadline for the payment of the balance of the due obligation was novated when private respondent continued to receive payments even beyond the 30 th July 1992 deadline, and that they, being unaware of the loan obligation to the Philippine National Bank, should not be held liable for any alleged bank charges and interests. Petitioners prayed that the consignation of the amount of P521,691.76, representing what they averred to be the amount due from them under the contract to sell, be meanwhile approved by the trial court and respondent be made to transfer to them the absolute ownership of the property. On 21 July 1994, the trial court issued an order denying the prayer for consignation for lack of merit. In time, the Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, of Baguio City finally rendered its decision, it adjudged: "WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered: "(a) Declaring defendants Biesterbos to have complied with their obligation under the contract to sell with respect to the townhouse and lot; "(b) Ordering plaintiff Bartolome to execute the corresponding deed of sale transferring the townhouse and lot to the defendants Biesterbos; "(c) Ordering the plaintiff Bartolome to deliver the Transfer Certificate of Title to the defendants-buye