Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Manila Second division G.R. No. L-65!5 September !"# $%% &'L'N()S* CR)+'* C,RP,R*',N# petitioner# vs. *) 'N*)RM)+'*) PP)LL*) C,/R* and N)S*,R 0. S/1G 2R.# respondents SRM')N*,# 2.3
&C*S3 Nestor Sunga purchased a passenger minibus Mazda from the Motorcenter, Inc. and for which he executed a promissory note to pay the price in monthly basis. He executed executed a chatte chattell mortga mortgage ge in favor of the Motorc Motorcent enter, er, Inc. he he !hatte !hattell Mortgage and "ssignment "ssignment was assigned to the #ilinvest !redit !orporation. !orporation. he mini minibu buss was was seiz seized ed by two two $%& $%& empl employ oyee eess of the the defe defend ndan antt #ili #ilinv nves estt !red !redit it !orporation who claimed that he was delin'uent in the payments of his vehicle. #lorence (nia of the #ilinvest explained that the minibus was confiscated because the balance balance was already already past due. "fter "fter verification verification that his accounts accounts are all in order, #lorence #lorence (nia admitted it was their fault. he motor vehicle was was returned to the plaintiff upon proper receipt. "fte "fterr trial trial,, the the cour courtt rend render ered ed deci decisi sion onss gran granti ting ng Sung Sungaa mora moral, l, actu actual al damages, litigation expenses and "ttorney)s fees. #ilinvest filed motion to review the decision of the court. he !ourt of "ppeals affirmed the decision of the trial court but increased the amount to be paid for the moral damages.
'SS/)3 *hether or not the respondent court erred in increasing the amount of moral damages
R/L'NG3 +es. he he respo respond nden entt cour courtt comm commit itte ted d a grav gravee abus abusee of disc discre reti tion on in increasing extravagantly the award of moral damages and in granting litigation expenses. here is no dispute that the private respondent, is entitled to moral damages due to the unwarranted seizure of the minibus Mazda. !onsidering, ho4ever# that
respondent Sunga was dispossessed of his motor vehicle for barely three days, the award of moral damages even in the sum of -,. is excessive for it must be emph emphas asiz ized ed that that "damag "damages es are are not intended intended to enrich enrich the the compla complaina inant nt at the expense of a defendant.” hey are awarded awarded only to enable enable the in/ured in/ured parties parties to obtain means, diversions or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral sufferings the in/ured parties have undergone by reason of defendant)s culpable action action.. In other words, words, the award award of moral moral damages damages is aimed aimed at a restor restorati ation on within the limits of the possible, of the spiritual status 'uo ante0 and therefore it must must be propor proportio tionat natee to the suffer suffering ing inflic inflicted ted.. Moreov Moreover er,, 1 Moral damages though not incapable of pecuniary estimations, are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer wrongdoer.."
