FACTS Plus Builders Inc herein respondent is in charge of the construction and

Facts plus builders inc herein respondent is in

This preview shows page 14 - 16 out of 26 pages.

FACTS: Plus Builders, Inc., herein respondent, is in charge of the construction and sale of the houses at Bahayang Pag-asa Subdivision. Spouses Binarao, petitioners, purchased a house and lot in Bahayang Pag- asa Subdivision for a total price of P327,491.95. Petitioner Jose Binarao executed an Affidavit of Undertaking on Equity whereby he agreed to pay respondent P96,791.95. Later, he paid the amount of P20,000.00 to respondent, leaving a balance of P65,571.22 payable in three installments. For failure of the petitoners to compy with the undertaking, respondent filed with the MTC a complaint for a sum of money against petitioners. MTC ruled in favor of Plus Builders. On appeal, the Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, Manila, rendered a Decision3 dated November 23, 2001, affirming in toto the MTC Decision, holding that petitioners, in their answer, did not deny respondent’s allegation in its complaint that they have still an outstanding balance of P65,571.22. What is denied by petitioners in their answer, if at all, is the fact that there is no agreed payment plan. But, as to the fact, that petitioners still owe P65,571.22, as balance after payment of P20,000.00, is admitted by petitioners as this fact is never denied by them. On petion for review to the CA, it affirmed in toto the RTC Decision. Hence this petition. ISSUE: WON petitioners admitted absolutely in their answer their liability. HELD: Yes. Sec. 4, Rule 129 of the Revised Rules of Court provides: "Sec. 4. Judicial admissions. – An admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, does not require proof. The admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made." A party may make judicial admissions in (a) the pleadings, (b) during the trial, either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations, or (c) in other stages of the judicial proceeding.5 Here, petitioners admitted in their answer the allegation in paragraph 4 of respondent’s complaint. As correctly ruled by the Court of Appeals, petitioners admitted that: (a) they paid the amount of P20,000.00; (b) they still have a balance of P65,571.72; and (c) the unpaid balance is to be paid in three installments. It is well- settled that judicial admissions cannot be contradicted by the admitter who is the party himself and binds the person who makes the same, and absent any showing that this was made thru palpable mistake (as in this case) , no amount of rationalization can offset it. G.R. No. 174154, October 17, 2008 JESUS CUENCO vs. TALISAY TOURIST SPORTS COMPLEX, INCORPORATED and MATIAS B. AZNAR III EVIDENCE CASE DIGESTS | RULE 129 14
Image of page 14
FACTS: Cuenco leased from respondent a property to be operated as a cockpit. Upon expiration of the contract, Talisay Sports Complex conducted a public bidding for the lease of the property, which Cuenco also participated. The lease was eventually awarded to another bidder. Thereafter, Cuenco demanded through several demand letters for the return of his deposit in the sum of P500k. However, all remained unheeded.
Image of page 15
Image of page 16

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture