G.R. No. 109966 - ELISCO TOOL MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, VS. COURT OF APPEALS, ROLANDO LANTAN, AND RINA LANTAN D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, plaintiffs prays that judgment be rendered as follows: ON THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Ordering defendant Rolando Lantan to pay the plaintiff the sum of P39,054.86 plus legal interest from the date of demand until the whole obligation is fully paid; ON THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION To forthwith issue a Writ of Replevin ordering the seizure of the motor vehicle more particularly described in paragraph 3 of the Complaint, from defendant Rolando Lantan and/or defendants Rina Lantan, John Doe, Susan Doe and other person or persons in whose possession the said motor vehicle may be found, complete with accessories and equipment, and direct deliver thereof to plaintiff in accordance with law, and after due hearing to confirm said seizure and plaintiff's possession over the same; ON THE ALTERNATIVE CAUSE OF ACTION In the event that manual delivery of the subject motor vehicle cannot be effected for any reason, to render judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant Rolando Lantan ordering the latter to pay the sum of SIXTY THOUSAND PESOS (P60,000.00) which is the estimated actual value of the above-described motor vehicle, plus the accrued monthly rentals thereof with interests at the rate of fourteen percent (14%) per annum until fully paid; PRAYER COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION Ordering the defendant Rolando Lantan to pay the plaintiff an amount equivalent to twenty-five percent (25%) of his outstanding obligation, for and as attorney's fees; Ordering defendants to pay the cost or expenses of collection, repossession, bonding fees and other incidental expenses to be proved during the trial; and Ordering defendants to pay the costs of suit. Plaintiff also prays for such further reliefs as this Honorable Court may deem just and equitable under the premises. Upon petitioner's posting a bond in the amount of P120,000, the sheriff took possession of the car in question and after five (5) days turned it over to petitioner. [4] In due time, private respondents filed their answer. They claimed that the agreement on which the complaint was based had not been signed by petitioner's representative, Jose Ma. S. del Gallego, although it had been signed by private respondent Rolando Lantan; that their true agreement was "to buy and sell and not lease with option to buy" the car in question at a monthly amortization of P1,000; and that petitioner accepted the installment payments made by them and, in January 1986, agreed that the balance of the purchase price would be paid on or before December 31, 1986. Private respondents cited the provision of the agreement making respondent Rolando Lantan liable for the expenses for registration, insurance, repair and maintenance, gasoline, oil and part replacements, inclusive of all necessary expenses, as evidence that the transaction was one of sale. Private respondents further alleged that, in any event, petitioner had waived its rights under the agreement because of the following circumstances: (a) while the parti