15. LUCIA TAN, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

ARADOR VALDEHUEZA and REDICULO

VALDEHUEZA, defendants-appellants.
[G.R. No. L-38745 Auu!" #, 1$75 CA%TRO, J.:&
TO'IC( Loan - %)*+,- Loan o. /u"uu*
DOCTRINE( A.")0,- 1115 o2 "3- N-4 C)5), Cod- .-)!".a")on )! no ,on-. a .-6u)!)"- 2o. "3- 5a,)d)"7
o2 a *o."a-. T3- 0on".a0"! 43)03 +u.+o."-d "o 8- pacto de retro ".an!a0")on! a.- +.-!u*-d "o
8- -6u)"a8,- *o."a-!,

43-"3-. .-)!"-.-d o. no", "3-.- 8-)n no "3).d +a.")-! )n5o,5-d
9ACT%(
1. Plaintiff-appellee Lucia Tan instituted an action against the defendants-appellants Arador
Valdehueza and Rediculo Valdehueza for the following:
a. !R"T #A$"% & A#T!&': (eclaration of ownership and recover) of possession of the
parcel of land
8. "%#&'( #A$"% & A#T!&': #onsolidation of ownership of two portions of another
parcel of *unregistered+ land descri,ed
-. The parcel of land in .uestion in the 1
!"
Cau!- o2 A0")on was the su,/ect 0atter of the pu,lic
auction sale held 1arch 2, 1344 where Tan was the highest ,idder.
a. A #ertificate of "ale was e5ecuted in favor of Lucia Tan
8. Arador Valdehueza failed to redee0 the land within the period of one )ear so Vicente
Roa who was the %5-&fficio Provincial "heriff e5ecuted an A6"&L$T% (%%( & "AL%
in favour of Lucia Tan
7. The 1
nd
Cau!- o2 A0")on! involves the e5ecution of - (eeds of Pacto (e Retro "ale of - portions
of a parcel of land with the total a0ount of P1,488 e5ecuted ,) the defendants Arador
Valdehueza and Rediculo Valdehueza in favor of Lucia Tan
a. A right to repurchase was 0entioned in the deed.
8. The defendants re0ained in the possession of the land and paid ta5es
0. On,7 on- o2 "3- D--d! o2 'a0"o D- R-".o %a,- 4a! .-)!"-.-d
9. A co0plaint for in/unction was filed ,) Tan against the Valdehuezas to en/oin the0 :fro0 entering
the a,ove-descri,ed parcel of land and gathering the nuts therein;
a. (is0issed for failure of the parties <to see= for the i00ediate trial;
4. T# declared Lucia Tan as the a,solute owner of the propert) and ordered Valdehuezas not to
encroach and 0olest Tan in the e5ercise of her propert) rights.
I%%UE( >hether the transactions ,etween the parties were si0ple loan?
HELD( No. T.)a, 0ou." .u,)n *od)2)-d
1. A.")0,- 1115 o2 "3- N-4 C)5), Cod- !"a"-! "3a" .-)!".a")on )! no ,on-. a .-6u)!)"- 2o. "3-
5a,)d)"7 o2 a *o."a-
-. In "3- +.-!-n" 0a!-( Valdehuezas re0ained in possession of the land and paid the ta5es, "3-
0on".a0"! 43)03 +u.+o."-d "o 8- pacto de retro ".an!a0")on! a.- +.-!u*-d "o 8- -6u)"a8,-
*o."a-!,

43-"3-. .-)!"-.-d o. no", "3-.- 8-)n no "3).d +a.")-! )n5o,5-d
7. The Valdehuezas also failed to prove the deliver) to Tan of the harvest fro0 the land involved@
theus the) did not suffer an) pre/udice when the trial court ordered for legal interest.
9. "# did not i0pose legal interest since parties did not stipulate for such and it was not pra)ed for
,) Lucia Tan.