Addison vs.

Felix
38 Phil. 404

Facts:

By a public instrument dated June 11, 1914, Addison sold to Marciana Felix four parcels of land.
Felix paid, at the time of the execution of the deed, P3,000 and bound herself to pay the remainder
in installments. In January 1915, plaintiff filed a suit to compel the defendant to make payment of
the final installment. The defendant contends that the plaintiff had absolutely failed to deliver to the
former the lands that were the subject matter of the sale, notwithstanding the demands made upon
him. Also, the plaintiff was only able to designate only 2 of the 4 parcels and more than 2/3 of
these two were found to be in possession of one Juan Villafuerte. The trial court rendered
judgment holding the contract of sale to be rescinded. Hence, this appeal.

Issue:

Whether or not the lands were delivered.

Held:

No. The records show that the plaintiff did not deliver the thing sold. It is true that the execution of a
public instrument is equivalent to the delivery of the thing which is the object of the contract, but, in
order that this symbolic delivery may produce the effect of tradition, it is necessary that the vendor
shall have had such control over the thing sold, that at the moment of the sale, its material delivery
could have been made. It is not enough to confer upon the purchaser the ownership and the right
of possession. The thing sold must be placed in his control.