Questions

December 2022 1 4 Report
WHAT IS YOUR REACTION ABOUT THIS CASE? answer in english! On December 13, 1991, Lipat Sr., as represented by Lipat Jr., executed a Contract to Sell (CTS) in favor of the petitioner, as represented by its President, Manuel Tubao (Tubao ), whereby the former agreed to sell to the latter two parcels of land in Naga City covered by Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 12236 and 12237 (subject properties) for a consideration of ₱200.00 per square meter.4 As stipulated in the CTS, the petitioner had 90 days to pay in full the purchase price of the subject properties; otherwise, the CTS shall automatically expire. The period, however, elapsed without payment of the full consideration by the petitioner.5 According to the petitioner, the 90-day period provided in the CTS was subject to the condition that the subject properties be cleared of all claims from third persons considering that there were pending litigations involving the same.6 Upon the expiry of the 90-day period, and despite the failure to clear the subject properties from the claims of third persons, the petitioner contributed financial assistance for the expenses of litigation involving the subject properties with the assurance that the CTS will still be enforced once the cases are settled.7 In the meantime, the petitioner agreed to pay rental fees for their occupation of the subject properties from 1992 to 1996.8 After the termination of the cases involving the subject properties, however, the respondents refused to enforce the CTS on the ground that the same had expired and averred that there was no agreement to extend its term.9 Consequently, the petitioner filed a case for Specific Performance and Damages with Prayer for the Issuance of Preliminary Injunction against the respondents on June 10, 1997 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City.10 For their defense, the respondents alleged that the CTS was not enforced due to the petitioner's failure to pay the P200.00 per sq m selling price before the expiration of its term.11 As a result, the members of the petitioner were required to pay rental fees corresponding to the area they occupy.12 Moreover, the respondents claimed that the so called "financial assistance" they received from the petitioner's members was in the nature of a loan and that it has nothing to do with the alleged extension of their CTS.13 Considering that the CTS already expired, Lipat Jr. suggested an individual contract for each member of the petitioner. Only four members, however, were able to buy individual lots, namely, Consuelo Gomez, Edna Estioko, Gina Villar, and Pablo Calubad.14 Also, Rosemarie Buenaventura, who is not a member of the petitioner, was able to buy two lots on the subject properties. Consequently, she filed an urgent Motion for Leave to Intervene which was granted by the trial court on August 4, 1997.15​

Answers & Comments

Add an Answer

Please enter comments
Please enter your name.
Please enter the correct email address.
You must agree before submitting.
More Questions From This User See All
understanding your purpose
Answer
question why man be born yet suffered and die
Answer
how do you win their trustanswer in english66986dd23088e36e0b318724bd639a6e 48218
Answer
why man be born yet suffered and die
Answer
Give Atleast 5 Major Possible Question about this..."The lived experiences of El...
Answer
watchvbfdsn2yt0yampfeatureshare
Answer
Ipaliwanag at magbigay ng halimbawa it in tagalog..Moral ValueRelates to conduct...
Answer
What was the moral lesson you want to impart on our discussion ( Character Forma...
Answer
Ipaliwanag sa tagalog ito...Value of the Holy Refers to the sacred andhallowed b...
Answer
kahulugan ng senuous at sexual value
Answer

Helpful Links

Helpful Social

Copyright © 2024 EHUB.TIPS team's - All rights reserved.