SUBJECT – Art. 1186 TAYAG and heirs of GALICIA v. CA and ALBRIGA! LEY"A #1$$%& Short version/ Summary: Summary: Albrigado Leyva fled an action action or specifc perormance perormance against vendors-petitioners vendors-petitioners (heirs o Galicia) on account o their reluctance to abide by the eed o !onveyance e"ecuted bet#een Galicia Sr$ and !elerina Labuguin (vendors) and Leyva (vendee)$ %he condition o the eed o !onveyance (pertinent (pertinent to our topic) is this: &' represents the *+,.S indebtedness #ith the &hilippine *eterans 0an1 #hich is hereby assumed by the *+,++$ %he vendors assert breach o such condition #hen vendee Leyva paid only &2342$5' &2342$5' to &hilippine &hilippine *eterans *eterans 0an1 0an1 #hile the the di6erence di6erence o the indebtedness indebtedness came rom vendor !elerina !elerina Labuguin$ Leyva claims that that the vendors voluntarily prevented prevented the ulfllment o her obligation to pay &' to &hilippine *eterans 0an1 #hen !elerina Labuguin paid part o such debt to &hilippine *eterans 0an1$ .%! and !A: .uled in avor o Leyva and applied Article ''72 o the !ivil !ode on constructive ulfllment$ !elerinas act o paying part o the debt to &hilippine *eterans 0an1 #as a ploy under Article ''72 o the !ivil !ode that prematurely prevented prevented Leyva rom paying the installment installment ully ully and or the the purpose o #ithdra#ing #ithdra#ing the the title to the lot$ +8+,S+: %he vendors argue that Art$ ''72 should not have been appreciated because they are the obligees #hile the proviso in point spea1s o the obligor$ S!: 9n a reciprocal obligation obligation li1e a contract o purchase both parties parties are mutually obligors obligors and also obligees$ 9t is puerile or the vendors to say that they are the only obligees under the contract since they are also bound as obligors to respect the stipulation in permitting vendee Leyva to assume the loan #ith the &hilippine *eterans 0an1 #hich the vendors impeded #hen they paid the balance o said loan$ As vendors they are supposed to e"ecute the fnal deed o sale upon ull payment o the balance as determined hereater$ 'a(ts) Albrigado Leyva fled an action or specifc perormance against heirs o Juan Galicia, Sr. on account o their reluctance to abide by the Deed o Conveyance eecuted bet!een Galicia Sr. and Celerina Labuguin "vendors# and Leyva "vendee#. $he deed o Conveyance had the ollo!ing terms% &. '(,))) is hereby ac*no!ledged ac*no!ledged to have have been been paid upon the eecution eecution o this agreement. +. '&),))) shall shall be paid paid !ithin &) days rom and and ater the eecution eecution o this this agreement. %. *1+,+++ re-resen re-resents ts the "E!RS/ "E!RS/ inde0ted inde0tedness ness ith ith the *hi2i--in *hi2i--ine e "eterans "eterans Ban3 hi(h is here04 ass5ed 04 the "EEE. . $he balance balance o '+-,))) '+-,))) shall shall be paid paid !ithin !ithin & year rom rom and and ater the the date o eecution o this instrument. $he vendors assert assert breach breach o condition condition ( !hen vendee vendee Leyva paid only ',/+.& ',/+.& to 'hilippine 0eteran1s 2an*, !hile the di3erence o the indebtedness came rom vendor Celerina Labuguin.
0endors also claim breach o condition , that not a single centavo o the '+-,))) balance !as paid. "not impt to our topic# Leyva claims that the vendors voluntarily prevent the ulfllment o her obligation to pay '&),))) to 'hilippine 0eterans 2an* !hen Celerina Labuguin paid part o such debt to 'hilippine 0eterans 2an*. Leyva also claims ull payment and compliance !ith the conditions o the Deed o Conveyance. *ro(ed5re) RTC) 4uled in avor o Leyva "vendee# on the basis o constructive ulfllment under Art. &&5. Leyva paid more than ',))).)) to the 'hilippine 0eterans 2an* but Celerina Labuguin, the sister and co6vendor o Juan Galicia, Sr. paid '(,--5.-- !hich circumstance !as construed to be a ploy under Article &&5 o the Civil Code that 7prematurely prevented plainti3 rom paying the installment ully7 and 7or the purpose o !ithdra!ing the title to the lot7. CA) A8rmed 4$C Iss5e7s) 9hether the vendors are only obligees in this case and thereore Art. &&5 on constructive ulfllment should not be applied, because the provision spea*s only o the obligor: !. Art. 1186 a--2ies. e2d7Ratio) ;n a reciprocal obligation li*e a contract o purchase, both parties are mutually obligors and also obliges, and any o the contracting parties may, upon non6ulfllment by the other privy o his part o the prestation, rescind the contract or see* ulfllment. ;n short, it is puerile or vendors to say that they are the only obligees under the contract since they are also bound as obligors to respect the stipulation in permitting vendee Leyva to assume the loan !ith the 'hilippine 0eterans 2an* !hich vendors impeded !hen they paid the balance o said loan. As vendors, they are supposed to eecute the fnal deed o sale upon ull payment o the balance as determined hereater. Digested by% Agee 4omero
