G.R. No. L-29742 March 29, 1972
Facts:
1.
Appellant filed a complaint in the City Court of Davao to recover from
defendant Mapayo the sum of P2, 800, which represented an unpaid balance of the
purchase price of an engine (Gray Marine), sold to defendant.
2.
The defendant admitted the said transaction in his answer but he alleged
that the engine had hidden defects causing him to spend the same amount for the
repairs and labor, wherefore plaintiff had agreed to waive the balance due
on the price of the engine and counterclaimed for damages and attorneys'
fees.
3.
The Court disallowed the defences and ordered the defendant to pay
plaintiff P2, 500.00 and costs.
4.
Defendant Mapayo appealed to CFI and filed an answer that was a virtual
reproduction of his original defences in the City Court.
5.
The defendant, as well as his counsel, failed to appear and the court
scheduled the case for hearing ex parte on the same day. The
Court ordered plaintiff to present his evidence but it failed to do so. The plaintiff's
counsel refused to comply and instead of calling his witnesses, he moved the
Court to present them after the defendant had presented their evidence. The
court asked said counsel twice whether he would present his evidence for the
plaintiff, but said counsel refused to do so and sticked to his demand that he
would introduce his witnesses only in rebuttal.
6.
This prompted the court to dismiss the case on ground of failure of the
plaintiff to prosecute, hence this appeal.
Issue: W/N the CFI validly dismissed the case on
ground of plaintiff's failure to prosecute
NO. The court held that the
dismissal in untenable and contrary to law. The defendant was not
able to support his special defenses. The answer admitted defendant's
obligation as stated in the complaint, and pleaded special defences hence the
plaintiff had every right to insist that it was for the defendant to come
forward with evidence in support of his special defences. Judicial admissions
do not require proof.
No comments:
Post a Comment