Chaves v. Gonzales

G.R. No. L-27454, April 30, 1970, 32 SCRA 547

FACTS:

On July 1963, Rosendo Chavez brought his typewriter to Fructuoso Gonzales a typewriter repairman for the cleaning and servicing of the said typewriter but the latter was not able to finish the job. The plaintiff gave the amount of P6.00 to the defendant which the latter asked from the plaintiff for the purchase of spare parts. Because of the delay of the repair the plaintiff decided to recover the typewriter to the defendant which he wrapped it like a package. When the plaintiff reached their home he opened it and examined that some parts and screws was lost. That on October 29, 1963 the plaintiff sent a letter to the defendant for the return of the missing parts, the interior cover and the sum of P6.00 (Exhibit D). The following day, the defendant returned to the plaintiff some of the missing parts, the interior cover and the P6.00. The plaintiff brought his typewriter to Freixas Business Machines and the repair cost the amount of P89.85. He commenced this action on August 23, 1965 in the City Court of Manila, demanding from the defendant the payment of P90.00 as actual and compensatory damages, P100.00 for temperate damages, P500.00 for moral damages, and P500.00 as attorney’s fees. The defendant made no denials of the facts narrated above, except the claim of the plaintiff that the cost of the repair made by Freixas Business Machines be fully chargeable against him.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the defendant is liable for the total cost of the repair made by Freixas Business Machines with the typewriter

RULING:

Yes. It is clear that the defendant-appellee contravened the tenor of his obligation because he not only did not repair the typewriter but returned it “in shambles”, according to the appealed decision. For such contravention, he is liable under Article 1167 of the Civil Code for the cost of executing the obligation in a proper manner. The cost of the execution of the obligation in this case should be the cost of the labor or service expended in the repair of the typewriter, which is in the amount of P58.75 because the obligation or contract was to repair it.

In addition, the defendant-appellee is likewise liable, under Article 1170 of the Code, for the cost of the missing parts, in the amount of P31.10, for in his obligation to repair the typewriter he was bound, but failed or neglected, to return it in the same condition it was when he received it.

 * Case digest by Immanuel Granada, LLB-1, Andres Bonifacio Law School, SY 2017-2018

By |2018-07-06T03:20:37+00:00June 4th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

Leave A Comment