URBANO SANTOS, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
JOSE C. BERNABE, ET AL., defendants.
PABLO TIONGSON and THE PROVINCIAL
SHERIFF OF BULACAN, appellants.
Facts:
On March 20, 1928, there were deposited in Jose C.
Bernabe's warehouse by the plaintiff Urbano Santos
778 cavans and 38 kilos of palay and by Pablo
Tiongson 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of the same grain.
On said date, March 20, 1928, Pablo Tiongson filed
with the Court of First Instance of Bulacan a complaint
against Jose C. Bernabe, to recover from the latter
the 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of palay deposited in the
defendant's warehouse. At the same time, the
application of Pablo Tiongson for a writ of attachment
was granted, and the attachable property of Jose C.
Bernabe, including 924 cavans and 31 1/2 kilos of
palay found by the sheriff in his warehouse, were
attached, sold at public auction, and the proceeds
thereof delivered to said defendant Pablo Tiongson,
who obtained judgment in said case.
The herein plaintiff, Urbano Santos, intervened in the
attachment of the palay, but upon Pablo Tiongson's
filing the proper bond, the sheriff proceeded with the
attachment, giving rise to the present complaint.
It does not appear that the sacks of palay of Urbano
Santos and those of Pablo Tiongson, deposited in
Jose C. Bernabe's warehouse, bore any marks or
signs, nor were they separated one from the other.
The plaintiff-appellee Urbano Santos contends that
Pablo Tiongson cannot claim the 924 cavans and 31
½ kilos of palay attached by the defendant sheriff as
part of those deposited by him in Jose C. Bernabe's
warehouse, because, in asking for the attachment
thereof, he impliedly acknowledged that the same
belonged to Jose C. Bernabe and not to him.
In the complaint filed by Pablo Tiongson against Jose
C. Bernabe, civil case No. 3665 of the Court of First
Instance of Bulacan, it is alleged that said plaintiff
deposited in the defendant's warehouse 1,026 cavans
and 9 kilos of palay, the return of which, or the value
thereof, at the rate of P3 per cavan was claimed
therein. Upon filing said complaint, the plaintiff applied
for a preliminary writ of attachment of the defendant's
property, which was accordingly issued, and the
defendant's property, including the 924 cavans and 31
½ kilos of palay found by the sheriff in his warehouse,
were attached.
Issue: WON Tiongson can claim the 924 cavans of
rice as his own.
Ruling:
The 778 cavans and 38 kilos of palay belonging to the
plaintiff Urbano Santos, having been mixed with the
1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of palay belonging to the
defendant Pablo Tiongson in Jose C. Bernabe's
warehouse; the sheriff having found only 924 cavans
and 31 1/2 kilos of palay in said warehouse at the
time of the attachment thereof; and there being no
means of separating form said 924 cavans and 31 1/2
of palay belonging to Urbano Santos and those
belonging to Pablo Tiongson, the following rule
prescribed in article 381 of the Civil Code for cases of
this nature, is applicable:
Art. 381. If, by the will of their owners, two
things of identical or dissimilar nature are
mixed, or if the mixture occurs accidentally, if
in the latter case the things cannot be
separated without injury, each owner shall
acquire a right in the mixture proportionate to
the part belonging to him, according to the
value of the things mixed or commingled.
The number of kilos in a cavan not having been
determined, we will take the proportion only of the 924
cavans of palay which were attached and sold,
thereby giving Urbano Santos, who deposited 778
cavans, 398.49 thereof, and Pablo Tiongson, who
deposited 1,026 cavans, 525.51, or the value thereof
at the rate of P3 per cavan.
Wherefore, the judgment appealed from is hereby
modified, and Pablo Tiongson is hereby ordered to
pay the plaintiff Urbano Santos the value of 398.49
cavans of palay at the rate of P3 a cavan, without
special pronouncement as to costs. So ordered.
Plaintiff-appellee Siari Valley Estates Inc. vs.
defendant-appellant Filemon Lucasan
GR No. L-7046, 31 August 1955, 97 Phil 987
Facts: In 1921, plaintiff-appellee and duly-organized
agricultural corporation Siari Valley Estate Inc. started
raising livestock on its 950-hectare ranch with 7 native
cattle. It acquired in 1923 thirty (30) native cattle and
two Indian bulls. Through a native black bull, native
stock was introduced into its herd and the male
offspring of that bull were castrated. Prior to Japanese
occupation, the fence enclosing Siari Valley's pasture
was well kept. But in 1943, a portion of that fence was
destroyed, causing some of the cattle straying into
defendant-appellant Filemon Lucasan's adjoining
unfenced range in Sindangan, Zamboanga. Several
men employed under him took advantage of the
situation and willfully, deliberately rounding up and
driving many animals from Siari pasture towards his
grazing land. In December 1948, Siari Valley Estate
Inc. filed an action to recover about 200 head of cattle
that were driven or wandered from its pasture lands
into defendant's adjoining ranch. It asked for return of
its animals with their offspring or for payment of those
disposed of by defendant, plus damages. Lucasan
denied in his answer that he appropriated or retained
any cattle belonging to Siari Valley and alleged on the
contrary that the plaintiff took away from his pasture
105 heads of cattle through force and intimidation. He
also demanded suitable compensation.
Farmer Jesus Pandi testified that during the war he
saw Lucasan's men Angel Galimon, Francisco Ramos
and Bilingan Subane driving 30 heads of cattle from
Siari Valley Estate to defendant's ranch, and his
testimony remained uncontradicted. Galimon, Ramos
and Bilingan were available during the trial, but
Lucasan did not place them on the witness stand to
contradict Pandi's testimony.
After submission of several motion and petitions by
both parties, a trial was held, and the Court of First
Instance (CFI) Zamboanga on 30 June 1952 (via Hon.
Judge Patricio Ceniza) decided in favor of Siari Valley
Estate, affirming its right to recover the (alleged)
strayed animals and its offspring. The said trial court
also ordered Filemon Lucasan to deliver all the cattle
in his ranch, especially the 323 animals and its
offspring demanded by Siari Valley. He was also
found guilty of contempt proceedings and he is
hereby sentenced to pay a fine of P500.00 pursuant
to Section 6, Rule 64 of the Rules of Court or suffer
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency at the
rate of one day, for every PhP2.50 that he fails to pay.

Issues: Defendant Filemon Lucasan appealed CFI

Zamboanga's decision raising the issue whether Siari
Valley Estate's cattle were commingled with his cattle,
and was such mix-up (commixtion) was made in bad
faith?

Legal Provisions: Articles 472-473 of RA 386 (The

New Civil Code) states:

Art. 472 - If by the will of their owners two things of

the same or different kinds are mixed, or if the mixture
occurs by chance, and in the latter case the things are
not separable without injury, each owner shall acquire
a right proportional to the part belonging to him,
bearing in mind the value of the things mixed or
confused. (381)

Art. 473 - If by the will of only one owner, but in good

faith, two things of the same or different kinds are
mixed or confused, the rights of the owners shall be
determined by the provisions of the preceding article.
If the one who caused the mixture or confusion acted
in bad faith, he shall lose the thing belonging to him
thus mixed or confused, besides being obliged to pay
indemnity for the damages caused to the owner of the
other thing with which his own was mixed. (382)

Held by the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court

denied Lucasan's appeal and affirmed CFI
Zamboanga's decision that held him guilty of
appropriating or retaining Siari Valley's Cattle and its
offspring. The Supreme Court also applied Article 473
of the New Civil Code in the present case and it held
that Lucasan acted in bad faith:

Lucasan's cowboys and even his sons Rafael and

Vicente rounded up and drove Siari Valley's cattle into
his pasture. He knew that he had the plaintiff's cattle,
but refused to return them despite plaintiff's demands.
He even threatened Siari Valley's men when it tried to
retrieve the animals. He harassed them with false
prosecutions for their attempts to get the said animals
back. He would not allow plaintiff' s cowboys to get
into his pasture to identify its flock. Lastly, he
rebranded several Siari Valley cattle with his own
brand and sold those cattle without registering the
sales. Also, after some cattle impounded were
entrusted to his custody as trustee, he disposed of not
less than 5 head of cattle among those he received as
such trustee. He disposed of much more cattle than
he had a right to.