Arrivas v. Bacotoc G.R. No.228704, 02 December 2020 , Peralta, C.J.:

Arrivas v. Bacotoc

G.R. No.228704 02 December 2020

Peralta, C.J.:

First Division

 

Nature of the Action: This is a case of petition for review on certiorari assailing the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals which affirmed, with modification,the RTC's decision finding the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Estafa under Article 315 (b) of the RPC.

Facts:

Diosa Arrivas was charged with Estafa before the RTC. Per Prosecution, Respondent Manuela Bacotoc and Arrivas knew each other. They are both engaged in buying and selling of jewelries and had done business together countless times.

Arrivas then told Bacotoc that she knew someone who was interested in a male's ring and willing to buy one in an amount ranging from P50,000 - P80,000. Considering of teh price, Bacotoc was hesitant to entrust the same to Arrivas. But then, she convinced Bacotoc and promised to  return the same if the buyer would not buy the same or if he decides to purchase the same, she will immediately deliver the amount. they agreed to execute a trust receipt as they usually do. thereafter, Arrivas failed to deliver the payment nor the ring. However, Arrivas cannot be found. It was only after two weeks when they finally meet. Then Bacotoc allowed Arrivas to pay the ring in installment but no payment was made. A demand letter was sent to Arrivas. She then promised but again failed to comply. On the other hand the Petitioner claimed that she had paid partially the amount prior to the filing of the complaint and made several payments thereafter. After trial, the Court convicted Arrivas guilty of the offense Swindling. On appeal, CA affirmed the RTC's decision but with modifications. Petitioner moved for reconsideration but the same was denied. Hence, this petition for review.

Issue:

Whether there was novation of the principal obligation of trust.

Ruling

Likewise, novation will not apply even if the P20,000.00 was made before demand.

Novation is defined as the extinguishment of an obligation by the substitution or change of the obligation by a subsequent one which terminates the first, either by changing the object or principal conditions, or by substituting the person of the debtor, or subrogating a third person in the rights of the creditor.

Article 1292 of the Civil Code on novation further provides:

Article 1292. In order that an obligation may be extinguished by another which substitute the same, it is imperative that it be so declared in unequivocal terms, or that the old and the new obligations be on every point incompatible with each other.

It is well settled that novation is never presumed - novatio non praesumitur. As the party alleging novation, the onus of showing clearly and unequivocally that novation had indeed taken place rests on the petitioner. This, however, she failed to do.