[G.R. No. 90828. September 5, 2000] MELVIN COLINA COLINARES RES an LOR!I LOR!INO NO VELOSO VELOSO,, petitioners, vs. "ONORA#LE vs. "ONORA#LE CO$R% O& A''EALS, an %"E 'EO'LE O& %"E '"ILI''INES, respondents. 'onente( Davide, Jr., C.J. &a)t*( 1. In 1979 Melvin Colinares Colinares and Lordino Lordino Veloso, Veloso, petitioners, petitioners, were contracted contracted for a consi consider derati ation on of P40,00 P40,000 0 ! t"e Car#el Car#elite ite $is $ister ters s of Ca%a!a Ca%a!an n de &ro &ro Cit! Cit! to renovate t"e latters convent at Ca#a#an'an, Ca%a!an de &ro Cit!. (. &n )0 &ctoer 1979, 1979, petitioners petitioners otained otained *,)7+ $ $olatone $olatone aco-stica aco-sticall oard (4, )00 $ tan%-ile wood tiles 1(1(, (+0 $ Marcelo econo#! tiles and ( %allons /MLI ce#ent ad"esive fro# CM 2-ilders Centre for t"e constr-ction pro3ect. ). "e followin% da!, da!, )1 &ctoer 1979, Petitioners Petitioners applied applied for a co##ercial co##ercial letter of credi creditt wit" wit" t"e P"i P"ilip lippi pine ne 2an5in 2an5in% % Corpor Corporati ation, on, Ca%a!a Ca%a!an n de &ro &ro Cit! Cit! ranc" ranc" 6"ereafter 6"ereafter P2C in favor of CM 2-ilders Centre. a. P2C approved approved t"e letter of credit credit for P((,)89.80 to cover t"e f-ll invoice invoice val-e of t"e %oods. . Petitioners si%ned a pro'for#a tr-st receipt as sec-rit!. sec-rit!. c. "e loan was d-e on (9 Jan-ar! Jan-ar! 1980. ). &n )1 &ctoer 1979, P2C P2C deited P+,7(0 fro# Petitioners Petitioners #ar%inal #ar%inal deposit as partial pa!#ent of t"e loan. 4. &n 7 Ma! 1980, P2C P2C wrote to Petition Petitioners ers de#andin% de#andin% t"at t"at t"e a#o-nt e paid wit"in seven da!s fro# notice. *. Instea Instead d of co#pl!in co#pl!in% % wit" wit" P2 P2Cs Cs de#and de#and,, Veloso eloso confess confessed ed t"at t"at t"e! t"e! lost lost P19,19*.8) in t"e Car#elite Monaster! Pro3ect and re-ested for a %race period of -ntil 1* J-ne 1980 to settle t"e acco-nt. +. P2C sent a new de#and letterto letterto Petitioners Petitioners on 1+ &ctoer 1980 and infor#ed t"e# t"e# t"at t"at t"eir t"eir o-tsta o-tstand ndin% in% alanc alance e as of 17 ove# ove#er er 1979 1979 was P(0,8( P(0,8(4.4 4.40 0 ecl-sive of attorne!s fees of (*:.
7. &n ( Dece#er 1980, Petitioners proposed t"at t"e ter#s of pa!#ent of t"e loan e #odi;ed as follows< P(,000 on or efore ) Dece#er 1980, and P1,000 per #ont" startin% )1 Jan-ar! 1980 -ntil t"e acco-nt is f-ll! paid. a. Pendin% approval of t"e proposal, Petitioners paid P1,000 to P2C on 4 Dece#er 1980, and t"ereafter P*00 on 11 er-ar! 1981, 1+ Marc" 1981, and (0 =pril 1981. . Conc-rrentl! wit" t"e separate de#and for attorne!s fees ! P2Cs le%al co-nsel, P2C contin-ed to de#and pa!#ent of t"e alance. 8. &n 14 Jan-ar! 198), Petitioners were c"ar%ed wit" t"e violation of P.D. o. 11* 6r-st >eceipts Law in relation to =rticle )1* of t"e >evised Penal Code in an Infor#ation w"ic" was ;led wit" t"e >e%ional rial Co-rt of Ca%a!an de &ro Cit!. a. "e case was doc5eted as Cri#inal Case o. 1)90. 9. D-rin% trial, petitioner Veloso insisted t"at t"e transaction was a clean loan as per veral %-arantee of Ca!o ?arcia -i@a, P2Cs for#er #ana%er. a. Ae and petitioner Colinares si%ned t"e doc-#ents wit"o-t readin% t"e ;ne print, onl! learnin% of t"e tr-st receipt i#plication #-c" later. . B"en "e ro-%"t t"is to t"e attention of P2C, Mr. -i@a ass-red "i# t"at t"e tr-st receipt was a #ere for#alit!. 10. C< decision convictin% Petitioners of estafa for violatin% P.D. o. 11* in relation to =rticle )1* of t"e >evised Penal Code and sentencin% eac" of t"e# to s-er i#prison#ent of two !ears and one da! of prision correccional as #ini#-# to si !ears and one da! of prision mayor as #ai#-#, and to solidaril! inde#nif! P2C t"e a#o-nt of P(0,8(4.44, wit" le%al interest fro# (9 Jan-ar! 1980, 1( : penalt! c"ar%e per ann-#, (*: of t"e s-#s d-e as attorne!s fees, and costs. a. considered t"e transaction etween P2C and Petitioners as a tr-st receipt transaction -nder $ection 4, P.D. o. 11*. . Petitioners -se of t"e %oods in t"eir Car#elite #onaster! pro3ect an act of disposin% as conte#plated -nder $ection 1), P.D. o. 11*, and treated t"e c"ar%e invoice for %oods iss-ed ! CM 2-ilders Centre as a doc-#ent wit"in t"e #eanin% of $ection ) t"ereof. c. fail-re of Petitioners to t-rn over t"e a#o-nt t"e! owed to P2C constit-ted estafa. 11. Petitioners appealed fro# t"e 3-d%#ent to t"e Co-rt of =ppeals.
a. Petitioners asserted t"erein t"at t"e trial co-rt erred in r-lin% t"at t"e! violated t"e r-st >eceipt Law, and in "oldin% t"e# cri#inall! liale t"erefor. . In t"e alternative, t"e! contend t"at at #ost t"e! can onl! e #ade civill! liale for pa!#ent of t"e loan. 1(. C=< #odi;ed t"e 3-d%#ent of t"e trial co-rt ! increasin% t"e penalt! to si !ears and one da! of prision mayor as #ini#-# to fo-rteen !ears ei%"t #ont"s and one da! of reclusion temporal as #ai#-#. a. It "eld t"at t"e doc-#entar! evidence of t"e prosec-tion prevails over Velosos testi#on!, discredited Petitioners clai# t"at t"e doc-#ents t"e! si%ned were in lan5, and diselieved t"at t"e! were coerced into si%nin% t"e#. 1). Petitioners ;led a Motion for ew rial>econsideration alle%in% t"at t"e Disclos-re $tate#ent on LoanCredit ransaction si%ned ! t"e# and -i@a was s-ppressed ! P2C d-rin% t"e trial. a. t"at doc-#ent wo-ld "ave proved t"at t"e transaction was indeed a loan as it ears a 14: interest as opposed to t"e tr-st receipt w"ic" does not at all ear an! interest. . Petitioners f-rt"er #aintained t"at w"en P2C allowed t"e# to pa! in install#ent, t"e a%ree#ent was novated and a creditor'detor relations"ip was created. 14. C=< denied t"e Motion for ew rial>econsideration eca-se t"e alle%ed newl! discovered evidence was act-all! for%otten evidence alread! in eistence d-rin% t"e trial, and wo-ld not alter t"e res-lt of t"e case.
I**+e( B"et"er or not t"e transaction of Colinares falls wit"in t"e a#it of t"e Law on r-st >eceipt "e( Colinares received t"e #erc"andise fro# CM 2-ilders Centre on )0 &ctoer 1979. &n t"at da!, owners"ip over t"e #erc"andise was alread! transferred to Petitioners w"o were to -se t"e #aterials for t"eir constr-ction pro3ect. It was onl! a da! later, )1 &ctoer 1979, t"at t"e! went to t"e an5 to appl! for a loan to pa! for t"e #erc"andise. "is sit-ation elies w"at nor#all! otains in a p-re tr-st receipt
transaction w"ere %oods are owned ! t"e an5 and onl! released to t"e i#porter in tr-st s-se-ent to t"e %rant of t"e loan. "e an5 ac-ires a Esec-rit! interestF in t"e %oods as "older of a sec-rit! title for t"e advances it "ad #ade to t"e entr-stee. "e owners"ip of t"e #erc"andise contin-es to e vested in t"e person w"o "ad advanced pa!#ent -ntil "e "as een paid in f-ll, or if t"e #erc"andise "as alread! een sold, t"e proceeds of t"e sale s"o-ld e t-rned over to "i# ! t"e i#porter or ! "is representative or s-ccessor in interest. o sec-re t"at t"e an5 s"all e paid, it ta5es f-ll title to t"e %oods at t"e ver! e%innin% and contin-es to "old t"at title as "is indispensale sec-rit! -ntil t"e %oods are sold and t"e vendee is called -pon to pa! for t"e#G "ence, t"e i#porter "as never owned t"e %oods and is not ale to deliver possession. In a certain #anner, tr-st receipts parta5e of t"e nat-re of a conditional sale w"ere t"e i#porter eco#es asol-te owner of t"e i#ported #erc"andise as soon as "e "as paid its price. "ere are two possile sit-ations in a tr-st receipt transaction. "e ;rst is covered ! t"e provision w"ic" refers to #one! received -nder t"e oli%ation involvin% t"e d-t! to deliver it 6entre%arla to t"e owner of t"e #erc"andise sold. "e second is covered ! t"e provision w"ic" refers to #erc"andise received -nder t"e oli%ation to Eret-rnF it 6devolvera to t"e owner. ail-re of t"e entr-stee to t-rn over t"e proceeds of t"e sale of t"e %oods, covered ! t"e tr-st receipt to t"e entr-ster or to ret-rn said %oods if t"e! were not disposed of in accordance wit" t"e ter#s of t"e tr-st receipt s"all e p-nis"ale as estafa -nder =rticle )1* 61 of t"e >evised Penal Code, wit"o-t need of provin% intent to defra-d.
