WELDON CONSTRUCTION vs MANUEL CANCIO Case Digest


TITLE

WELDON CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, petitioner, vs.COURT OF APPEALS (Second Division) and MANUEL CANCIO, respondents.



March 7, 1961



FACTS

The present controversy arose from the construction of the Gay Theater building on the corner of Herran and Singalong Streets in Manila. Petitioner WELDON CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION sued the private respondent Manuel Cancio in the then Court of First Instance of Manila to recover P62,378.82 Pesos, which is ten per (10%) of the total cost of construction of the building, as commission, and P23,788.32 Pesos as cost of additional works thereon. Then Court of First, instance of Manila ruled that the agreement between the parties is a contract of supervision of construction found in Exhibit "A" and ordered the theater-owner Cancio to pay the ten per cent (10%) supervision fee or commission provided for in said contract. On appeal by the defendant Cancio, the Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's Decision and dismissed the Complaint.  Both parties moved for the reconsideration of the aforesaid Decision. The same division of the Court of Appeals denied the two Motions for Reconsideration. Not satisfied with the Resolution of its Second Motion for Reconsideration, plaintiff-appellee WELDON CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION elevated its case to this Tribunal by certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. . The modification by the Court of Appeals of said Decision in its Resolution of October 18, 1972 which dismissed the defendant's counterclaims is likewise AFFIRMED. Petition DISMISSED for lack of merit.





ISSUE



Whether or not the petition of the appellant is valid and reasonable.





HELD



No. The decision of the Court of Appeals is just and according to law. The claim that the petitioner demands is not valid because it is not written in the contract, and not agreed by both parties. The claim was just indicated in the proposal and was signed by the manager who is not an authorized signatory of the company.







RULING



ART. 1724. The contractor who undertakes to build a structure or any other work for a stipulated price, in conformity with plans and specifications agreed upon with the landowner can neither withdraw from the contract or demand an increase in the price on account of the higher cost of labor or materials, save when there has been a change in the plans and specifications, provided.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OBLIGATION & CONTRACTS Art. 1156 - 1161

Article 1278

PEREZ vs POMAR Case Digest