Tanguilig v.
CA not repair the typewriter but returned it in shambles, according
G.R. No. 117190, January 2, 1997
FACTS:
Chavez brought his typewriter on July of 1963 to Gonzales to have
it fixed. There was no agreement as to when the typewriter should
be ready for return to Chavez.
Gonzales was not able to finish the work after a certain time
despite repeated reminders from Chavez.
Gonzales asked Chavez for P6.00 for the purchase of spare parts
which Chavez gave.
In October 1963 Chavez went to Gonzales house and got the
typewriter. It was returned to him with the cover and some
essential parts missing.
Chavez formally demanded that the missing parts be returned
along with the cover and the sum of P6.00 which Gonzales did.
August 1964 the typewriter was fixed by another person which
cost ChavezP89.95 for materials and labor.
The trial court awarded Chavez damages of only P31.10 out of his
total claim of P690.00.
ISSUES:
WON Chavez should be entitled to greater damages than what was
awarded to him in the trial court
HELD:
YES.
1. Art. 1197 cannot be raised as a defense. Art. 1197 states that the
petitioner should have first filed for a petition from the Court,
fixing the period. This is not applicable because the time for
compliance has already expired, the defendant not having worked
on the typewriter and returning it to the owner unrepaired.
2. Gonzales is liable under Art. 1167 because of his non-performance.
He contravened the tenor of his obligation because he not only did
to the appealed decision.
ART. 1167. If a person obliged to do something fails to do
it, the same shall be executed at his cost. This same rule shall be
observed if he does it in contravention of the tenor of the
obligation. Furthermore, it may be decreed that what has been
poorly done be undone.
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, Fructuoso Gonzales 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.
But the moral damages and attorneys fees should not be awarded
because they were not alleged in the complaint.
Decision:
The appealed judgment is hereby modified, by ordering the defendant-
appellee to pay, as he is hereby ordered to pay, the plaintiff-appellant the
sum of P89.85, with interest at the legal rate from the filing of the
complaint. Costs in all instances against appellee Fructuoso Gonzales.