R E S O L U T I O N

 

 

 

MELENCIO-HERRERA, J.:

 

In the decision we promulgated on 9 May 1988, which is now the subject of a motion for reconsideration, private respondent Rudy Velayo Inc. (Velayo) was ordered, in the interest of substantial justice and in avoidance of multiplicity of suits, to pay petitioner, Commander Realty, Inc. (Commander), reasonable compensation for the use and occupation of the leased premises of P15,000.00 from 4 September 1980 to 4 September 1983; P20,000.00 from 4 September 1983 to 4 September 1985; and P25,000.00 from 4 September 1985 to 30 November 1987, the date that Velayo vacated the leased premises.   

 

Velayo now brings to the attention of the Court that the issue of rentals from 4 September 1980 to 4 September 1985 had already been laid to rest by the Court of Appeals (in CA-G.R. CV No. 06545)    1 when it fixed said rentals at P10,000.00 monthly, which Decision was affirmed by this Court in G. R. No. 76659 (brought up for the first time entitled "Commander Realty, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals and Rudy Velayo, Inc.," and that said rentals had been "religiously paid." The Resolution of affirmance of 29 April 1987 (Former Second Division), reads thus:

 

"After due consideration of the issues raised in the petition and the comment thereon, the Court resolved to DENY the petition, it appearing that the respondent Court of Appeals did not commit any reversible error and that its legal conclusion with respect to the terms and conditions of the renewed contract of lease, particularly the amount of rentals, is in accord with the law and jurisprudence on the matter." (p. 40, Rollo G.R. No. 76659)

 

Further, Velayo contends that there is no factual basis for the award of P25,000.00 rental from 4 September 1985 to 30 November 1987 as it had not yet filed its Answer in the case below entitled "Commander Realty, Inc., et al vs. Rudy Velayo, Inc." (Civil Case No. Q-46451)

 

Commander, however, insists that its cause of action in the Court below was for damages arising from Velayo's usurpation and occupation of the premises, which deprived petitioner of P65,000.00 monthly starting 5 September 1980 and ceased on 30 November 1987 when Velayo vacated the property; that rather than remand the case to the Trial Court, this Court in the interest of speedy justice and on the basis of the records showing that private respondent had abandoned the premises awarded "compensatory damages" over a period of seven (7) years; and that if the "award is only for the use of or rental of its premises then Commander is entitled to and so prays for further damages of at least P1M," specially considering that Velayo had left the premises in a state of disrepair (Petitioner's "Manifestation [for clarification]," pp. 173-175, Rollo).  

 

CONSIDERING that monthly rentals for 4 September 1980 to 4 September 1985 have, in fact, been fixed at P10,000.00 by the Court of Appeals and affirmed by this Court, and that the same have been paid; that it is to the interest of the parties that their controversy be settled here and now rather than go through a protracted proceeding in the Court below, it appearing that the controversy has been pending for approximately a total period of seven (7) years now; that the Court of Appeals held that the stipulated P10,000.00 monthly rental "is not really a bad bargain" (p. 8, Decision in CA-G.R. CV No. 06545), which Decision was affirmed by this Court (in G.R. No. 76659, supra) as being "in accord with the law and jurisprudence on the matter;" the Court RESOLVED to DELETE that portion of its judgment fixing compensation for the use and occupation of the leased premises from 4 September 1980 to 4 September 1985; and to REDUCE the compensation payable from 5 September 1985 to 30 November 1987 to P20,000.00 a month, double the rental fixed for 1980 to 1985, which amount we consider equitable and reasonable taking judicial notice of the general increase in rentals of real estate specially of business establishments.

 

Commander's prayer for further damages in the sum of P1M is denied it being clear from our Decision of 9 May 1988 that its cause of action is one for unlawful detainer and not for damages.   

 

The dispositive portion of the judgment sought to be reconsidered, therefore, is hereby amended to read as follows:

 

"WHEREFORE, Rudy Velayo Inc. is hereby ordered to pay a monthly rental of P20,000.00 from 5 September 1985 to 30 November 1987, with interest at the legal rate from the date of finality of this judgment until fully paid."

 

SO ORDERED.

 

Paras, Padilla, Sarmiento and Regalado, JJ., concur.

 

---------------

Footnotes

 

  1.  Decision penned by Justice Pedro A. Ramirez and concurred in by Justices Rodolfo A. Nocon and Fidel P. Purisima.

 

COMMANDER REALTY, INC., petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS and RUDY VELAYO, INC., respondents., G.R. No. 77227, 1988 Nov 29, 2nd Division

BATASnatin LIVE Free Legal Advice

Please watch out for Episode 5 - September 28, 2018 at 6:00 pm