PILAR ARAULLO MACOY, ON HER BEHALF AND AS JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE INTESTATE ESTATE OF THE LATE GREGORIA ARAULLO, ASSISTED BY HER HUSBAND, JOSE MACOY, PLAINTIFFS AND APPEL…

This action was instituted by Pilar Araullo Macoy—in her own behalf
and as judicial administratrix of the intestate estate of the late
Gregorio Araullo—for the purpose of compelling defendants Carmen
Vasquez Trinidad, Zacarias Jamelo and Jose Jamelo, to interplead and
litigate among themselves upon their conflicting claims on a given
obligation which plaintiff is willing to satisfy, but which, owing to
said conflicting claims, she does not know whom to pay. Plaintiff is
assisted by her husband Jose Macoy, whereas defendant Carmen Vasquez
Trinidad is assisted by her husband Pedro Trinidad. During the pendency
of the case, Gertrudis A. Martir was authorized to file a complaint in
intervention, in her capacity as administratrix of the intestate estate
of her deceased husband, Hermogenes Martir. Said defendants—with the
exception of Jose Jamelo—filed their respective answer to plaintiff’s
complaint, as well as to the complaint in intervention. In due course,
the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental, thereafter, rendered
a decision the dispositive part of which reads as follows:

“POR LO EXPUESTO, el Juzgado falla esta causa
ordenando a la demandante a pagar a la tercerista en su capacidad de
administradora del Intestado del finado Hermogenes Martir, dentro del
plazo de noventa (90) dias a contar desde la fecha en que sea
notificada de esta decision, el saldo del importe del credito
hipotecario a favor del finado Hermogenes Martir, con sus intereses de
12 por ciento anual desde el 27 de Octubre de 1937 hasta el 30 de Mayo
de 1940, y 8 por ciento anual desde el 31 de Mayo de 1940 hasta su
completo pago. Transcurrido dicho plaso, y en caso de incumplimiento de
dicho pago, el Sheriff Provincial vendera en publica subasta los bienes
objectos de la hipoteca, debiendo aplicarse el producto de la venta al
pago del credito hipotecario tantas veces mencionado y al pago de los
interes vencidos.

“Una vez satisfecho el saldo del importe
del credito hipotecario, y tan pronto como quede firme y ejecutoria
esta decision, la tercerista otorgara la correspondiente escritura de
traspaso de los Lotes Nos. 1200-B y 1200-C, ambas del Catastro de
Bacolod, con sus mejoras, y a favor del Intestado de la finado Gregoria
Araullo y Pilar Araullo, respectivamente.

“Se ordena a los
demandados Carmen Vasquez y Zacarias Jamelo para que paguen a la
tercerista en su referida capacidad las cantidades que respectivamente
recibieron erroneamente de la demandante, con sus intereses legales
desde la fecha de la presentacion de la demanda en esta causa hasta su
completo pago.

“Se sobreseen la contrademanda interpuesta por
Zacarias Jamelo en su escrito de contestaci6n, asi como la reconvencion
de la demandada Carmen Vasquez, y la demanda de terceria en cuanto la
misma se refiere a la demandante.

“Las costas seran tasadas en contra de los demandados en la demanda de interpleading.” (Record on Appeal, pp. 108-109.)

Defendant Carmen Vasquez y Trinidad has appealed from this decision and she now maintains:

I

“That the trial court erred in holding that the
transaction between Hermogenes Martir on the one hand and Pilar Araullo
and her deceased sister on the other, relating to Lots Nos. 1200-B and
1200-C of the Bacolod Cadastre, in so far as it affects the appellant,
Carmen Vasquez, was one of mortgage.

II

“That the trial court erred in holding that the
contract between Hermogenes Martir and Carmen Vasquez dated May 23,
1940, was a mortgage and not a sale with right of repurchase.

III

“That
the trial court erred in not ordering Zacarias Jamelo to pay to Carmen
Vasquez the sum of P825.00 which the former received from the plaintiff.

IV

“That the trial court erred in holding that, as
between the intervenor and Carmen Vasquez, the former has the better
right to receive payment of the alleged mortgage debt. Consequently it
erred in ordering Carmen Vasquez to pay to the intervenor the amount
the former has received from the plaintiff with legal interest from the
date of the complaint.

V

“That the trial court erred in not rendering judgment in favor of the appellant Carmen Vasquez.” (Appellant’s brief, pp. A-C.)

This case was submitted to the lower court for decision upon the following stipulation of facts:

“Comes now the parties in the above-entitled case
assisted by their respective counsel and to this Hon. Court
respectfully submit the following stipulation of facts, to wit:

“1.
That the facts herein below agreed and stipulated upon between the
parties are in addition to such other facts as are admitted by the
parties in their respective pleadings.

“2. That the
properties in question are presently registered in the name of
Hermogenes Martir, as single, and covered by Transfer Certificates of
Title Nos. RT-(506-T-25701) and RT-958 (507-T- 25702) for Lots Nos.
1200-B and 1200-C, respectively. Henceforth, any reference to
certificates of title means the certificates of title above mentioned
unless otherwise specifically stated.

“3. That the
aforementioned lots, more particularly described in the certificates of
title covering them respectively, were originally and previously
registered in the names of Gregoria Araullo and Pilar Araullo, the
latter being the plaintiff herein in her own behalf and in her capacity
as Administratrix of the intestate Estate of her sister Gregoria
Araullo, who died on or about March 3, 1945, and whose estate is the
subject of Administration proceedings, known as Special Proceedings No.
263 of this Hon. Court. That, for purposes of assessment, said
properties are in the names of Gregoria Araullo and Pilar Araullo as
evidenced by the tax declarations herewith attached as Exhibits ‘A’,
and ‘A-2’.

“4. That on October 27, 1937, Pilar Araullo Macoy
and the late Gregoria Araullo sold the above-mentioned properties with
all the improvements thereon to Hermogenes Martir, then single, for
P6,000, by virtue of which sale titles to the same were issued in his
name, and which continue to be in his name as stated in paragraph 1
hereof. Copy of said document of sale is herewith attached as Exhibit
‘B’.

“5. That on the same date, that is, on October 27, 1937,
the vendee, Hermogenes Martir, executed a contract granting the
vendors, Pilar Araullo Macoy and Gregoria Araullo, an option to
repurchase the said properties within eight (8) years from said date,
for the amount of P6,000 plus interests at the rate of 12 per cent per
annum. This option to repurchase, a copy of which is herewith attached
as Exhibit ‘C, was duly registered on December 22, 1939, and appears on
the back of the titles covering the properties in question and
identified as Entry No. 79,0.

“6. That on November 11, 1937,
the then registered owner, Hermogenes Martir, mortgaged the said
properties to one Luis F. de Castro for P15,000 at 12 per cent
interest,; subject to the other conditions in the deed of mortgage, the
debt to be paid within one (1) year. This deed of mortgage was duly
registered on November 11, 1937, and appears in the titles covering the
properties in question as Entry No. 57822.

“7. That on June
6, 1939, the Provincial Sheriff of Negros Occidental executed a
Certificate of Sale in favor of Luis F. de Castro, pursuant to Civil
Case No. 3135 (Execution of Mortgage) entitled ‘Luis F. de Castro vs.
Hermogenes Martir.’ This certificate was duly registered and appears in
the titles covering the properties in question as Entry No. 406,

“8.
That on May 23, 1940, before Pilar Araullo Macoy and her sister
Gregoria Araullo could exercise their option to repurchase mentioned in
paragraph 5 of this stipulation and before the period of redemption
granted by law to the mortgagor, Hermogenes Martir, to repurchase the
properties sold at public auction had expired, the said Hermogenes
Martir executed a contract entitled ‘Sale with right of repurchase” in
favor of Carmen Vasquez affecting all his rights and interests in the
said properties, the period of repurchase being for one (1) year from
the date of the instrument and for the sum of P4,000. This instrument,
copy of which is hereto attached as Exhibit ‘D’, was duly registered on
May 24, 1940, and appears on the back of the titles covering the said
properties as Entry No. 1128.

“9. That Hermogenes Martir, the
mortgagor and judgment debtor, exercised his right of redemption
granted by law on May 24, 1940, and on said date Luis F. de Castro, the
judgment creditor, through his attorney in fact, Santiago Ochoa,
executed a deed of redemption over the same properties in favor of
Hermogenes Martir, which deed of redemption was duly registered on the
back of the certificates of title covering the properties in question,
and is known as Entry No. 1127, Exhibit ‘E’

“10. That on May
31, 1940, before the option referred to in paragraph 5 above had
expired, Pilar Araullo Macoy and Gregoria Araullo executed a mortgage
of the lots in question and all the improvements thereon in favor of
Hermogenes Martir, for the amount of P7,300 for six (6) years at an
annual interest of 8 per cent, which instrument, copy of which is
herewith attached as Exhibit ‘F’, was duly registered on June 23, 1948,
and is identified as Entry No. 2087 appearing on the back of the titles
covering the said properties.

“11. That on May 15, 1941,
Hermogenes Martir sold all his rights and interest in the properties in
question to Jose Jamelo for P2,500, with a right to repurchase the same
within one (1) year from May 21, 1941, which deed Zacarias Jamelo
admits to be one of mortgage. This document was duly registered on May
26, 1941 and appears as Entry No. 2537 on the back of the titles to the
properties in question, and copy of which is herewith attached as
Exhibit ‘G’.

“12. That on May 19, 1941, Carmen Vasquez and
Pedro Trinidad wrote a letter to Hermogenes Martir extending the period
of the latter’s right to repurchase the properties in question up to
May 23, 1942. Copy of said letter is hereto attached as Exhibit ‘H’.

“13.
That on July 12, 1944, Jose J. Jamelo assigned to his father, Zacarias
Jamelo, one-half interest over the agreement between the said Jose J.
Jamelo and Hermogenes Martir, as shown by the corresponding deed, copy
of which is hereto attached as Exhibit T.

“14. That
Hermogenes Martir is now dead and his estate is the subject of
administration proceedings known as Special Proceeding No. 418 of this
Hon. Court and of which his widow the herein intervenor, is the
administratrix.

“15. That since 1937 and previous thereto up
to the present time, the plaintiff and her sister till her death, and
the plaintiff alone since then, had been in the actual, continuous and
uninterrupted possession of the said properties.

“16. That
Pilar Araullo Macoy, for herself and her sister, the deceased Gregoria
Araullo, had delivered certain amounts to Zacarias Jamelo and Carmen
Vasquez totalling as follows:

                                        To Carmen Vasquez ……………………………. P1,260.00
                                        To Zacarias Jamelo……………………………… 825.00

“17.
That the defendants in interpleader and the intervenor are claiming
adverse interests over the properties in question, by virtue of which
adverse claims the Plaintiff had been constrained to initiate the
present action in interpleader for protection of her own interests and
those of the intestate of her sister, Gregoria Araullo.

“18.
That Pilar Araullo and Gregoria Araullo had never exercised their
option to repurchase the properties in question, which option was given
them in an instrument mentioned in paragraph 5 hereof, by virtue of the
Exhibit ‘F’.

“19. That neither Hermogenes Martir, Zacarias
Jamelo, Jose Jamelo, nor any one in their behalf, had exercised the
right of repurchase pertaining to Hermogenes Martir in the instrument
mentioned in paragraph 8 hereof.

“20. That on June 21, 1944,
Jose Jamelo filed a complaint against Carmen Vasquez and her husband
Pedro Trinidad, known as Civil Case No. 73, the pendency of which was
duly noted on the title to the properties in question on July 25, 1944,
in order to exercise the right of redemption of Hermogenes Martir which
they have bought, depositing the amount of P4.000; that on January 17,
1945, the plaintiff filed a motion for the withdrawal of said complaint
and the withdrawal of the amount deposited. Copies of the motion and
the order of the Court for the withdrawal of the same and the amount on
deposit are herewith attached as Exhibits ‘J’ and ‘J-1’ respectively.

“21.
That Jose J. Jamelo has not answered the complaint in interpleader
notwithstanding the long lapse of the reglementary period within which
to answer the same, summons by publication having been made as to him.

“22.
That all the parties hereto agree that Certificates of Titles Nos.
RT-957 (506-T-25701) and RT-958 (507-T-25702), which are in the
possession of the defendant in interpleader Zacarias Jamelo, be
attached herewith as Exhibits ‘K’ and ‘K-1’ respectively.

“23,
That this stipulation of facts is without prejudice to such evidence as
may be presented by the parties in connection with their conflicting
claims on which they cannot arrive at a stipulation.

“In
witness whereof, the parties hereto, assisted by their respective
attorneys, have signed this stipulation of facts on the date and at the
place herein-below appearing and hereby agree to submit the case on the
same and on the pleadings of the parties.” (Record oh Appeal, pp.
96-105.)

In connection with the first assignment of error, it is not disputed
that, prior to October 27, 1937, plaintiff Pilar Araullo and her sister
Gregoria Araullo, now deceased, owned lots Nos. 1200-B and 1200-C of
the Cadastral Survey of the new City of Bacolod, with the house of
strong materials existing thereon, assessed at P6,000, which properties
were covered by Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 25701 and 25702, in
their names. On said date, they executed the document Exhibit B,
purporting to be a deed of absolute sale of said properties for P6,000,
to Hermogenes Martir. Exhibit B was acknowledged before Notary Public
Gaudencio Occeno and entered in his notarial register, as document No.
118, page 3, book V, series of 1937.

On the same date, Hermogenes Martir and the Araullo sisters executed
the deed Exhibit C, whereby the former granted the latter the right to

“* * * repurchase the above described properties for
the sum of SIX THOUSAND PESOS (P6,000.00), plus the Interests of this
amount at the rate of 12 per cent per annum, in the installments within
the period of eight (8) years * * *.

“* * * provided, That
every monthly installments of not less than Ninety Pesos (P90.00) which
the Second Party must pay the First Party, should be applied first for
payment of the interest due per month, and the rest for part payment of
the repurchase price in the Sum of Six Thousand Pesos (P6,000) and
provided, further that

‘1. During the terms of eight years
the Second Party shall have possession of the House above described,
shall pay the yearly taxes of the land and the house, and continue
paying the premium of the Insurance Policy No. 2151 of the House, for
the Sum of P5,000, which insurance, in case of payment of the insurance
company shall be delivered to the First Party, Hermogenes Martir, to be
applied for part payment of the repurchase price of the properties
hereof described.’ ” (Record of Exhibits, p. 8.)

Exhibit C was acknowledged before the same notary public and entered
in his notarial register as document No. 119, page 3, Book V, series of
1937.

Again, on the same date, Gregoria F. Araullo executed a document of the following tenor:

“For valuable consideration I hereby assign and
convey unto Mr, Hermogenes Martir, of age, single, Filipino, and
resident of the Municipality of Bacolod, Province of Negros Occidental,
Philippine Islands, my monthly salary of Ninety Pesos (P90.00) from the
Government and for which purposely, I hereby authorize the said
Hermogenes Martir, his heirs, executors, or assigns, to make the
necessary collection of the said amount from the month to month for a
period of Ninety-Six Months, from and after this date, November 1, 1937.

“In
witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hands this 27th day of October,
1937, at Bacolod, Occidental Negros, Philippine Islands.” (Record of
Exhibits, p. 6.)

which was acknowledged before Notary Public Occeno and entered in
his notarial register as document No. 120, page 3, Book V, series of
1937.

On June 23, 1939, Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 506 and 507,
covering the properties in question, were issued in the name of
Hermogenes Martir.

On May 27, 1940, the latter and Carmen Vasquez executed the document
Exhibit D, which purports to convey to Carmen Vasquez the right,
interest and participation of Hermogenes Martir in and to five (5)
parcels of land, including the two (2) involved in the case at bar, for
P4,000, subject to redemption within one year, which, by a letter
(Exhibit H) of Carmen Vasquez and her husband, Pedro Trinidad, dated
May 19, 1941, was extended to May 23, 1942.

Meanwhile, or on May 31, 1940, the Araullo sisters and Hermogenes
Martir had executed the document Exhibit F, whereby said sisters
acknowledged that they were indebted to Martir in the sum of P7,300,
said to have been received from him prior thereto, and constituted, in
favor of Hermogenes Martir, a first mortgage on the two lots in
question, which was the property of said sisters, according to Exhibit
F, to secure payment, not later than July 1, 1946, of said obligation
of P7,300, with interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum.

Upon consideration of these facts, the lower court said, referring
to the transaction between Hermogenes Martir and the Araullo sisters:

“Dados los terminos de la escritura Exhibito ‘C’, el Juzgado es
claramente de opinion que la referida transaction fue una de hipoteca,
asi lo dexnuestran los siguientes hechos:

“1.° Que los dos lotes en cuesti6n, con sus mejoras,
a pesar de la supuesta escritura de venta Exhibito ‘B’, permanecieron,
y hasta la fecha continuan en poder de la demandante Pilar Araullo y en
su finada hermana Gregoria Araullo;

“2.° La estipulacion
sobre el tipo de interes que la demandante y su finada hermana debieran
pagar durante el plazo de recompra sobre el precio convenido de dicha
recompra;

“3.° El reconocimento expreso que el finado
Hermogenes Martir presto” respecto al titulo que como dueiias ejercian
la demandante y su finada hermana sobre los lotes en cuestion,
reconocimiento que aparece en la escritura de fecha 31 de Mayo de 1940,
Exhibito ‘F’ de la estipulacion; y

“4.° El reconocimiento
implicito de la cualidad de deudoras hipotecarias de la demandante y de
su finada hermana que los demandados Carmen Vasquez y Zacarias Jamelo
han prestado al aceptar ambos las cantidades que en concepto de
intereses recibieron de dicha demandante y de su hermano.” (Record on
Appeal, pp. 105-106.)

It is not denied that as between the Araullo sisters, on the one
hand, and Hermogenes Martir, on the other; the former were mortgagors,
not vendors, and the latter a mortgagee, not vendee, of the property in
litigation. Appellant maintains, however, that, insofar as she is
concerned, the nature of the relations between the Araullo sisters and
Hermogenes Martir should be determined by the records existing in the
office of the register of deeds on May 23, 1940, when Exhibit D was
executed in her favor. On that date, Hermogenes Martir was the
registered owner of said property, it being covered by Transfer
Certificates of Title Nos. 506 and 507 issued in his name. The only
limitation to his title, insofar as pertinent to the case at bar, was
the memorandum on the back of the aforementioned certificates of title
relative to the option of the Araullo sisters to repurchase said
properties subject to the terms and conditions stated in Exhibit C. The
deed Exhibit F, whereby the Araullo sisters mortgaged the same property
to Hermogenes Martir, did not exist until May 31, 1940, or over a week
after the execution of the deed of sale, Exhibit D, in favor of Carmen
Vasquez, what is more, Exhibit F was not registered until June 23,
1948. Consequently, appellant argues, said Exhibit F can not bind or
otherwise affect her and, insofar as she is concerned, Hermogenes
Martir must be deemed to be the owner of the property in dispute,
subject only to said option of the Araullo sisters.

Appellant’s pretense cannot be sustained, for when Exhibit D was
executed, on May 23, 1940, appellant had knowledge of facts which were
sufficient to inform her of the true nature of the transaction between
Hermogenes Martir and said sisters. For instance:

1. Hermogenes Martir was not in possession of said property,
   which had always been, and still is, held by the Araullo sisters. Had
   the latter really made a sale in favor of Hermogenes Martir, the object
   of the transaction would have been delivered to him, unless he had
   leased the property to said sisters, and the records of the Register of
   Deeds showed, not only that he had not done so, but, also, that he had
   acknowledged their right to retain possession of said property.

2. Moreover, said records showed that, although Exhibit C purported to give the Araullo sisters the right to repurchase
   the aforementioned property, it, also, (a) provided for the payment of
   interest, at the rate of 12 per cent per annum, on the alleged
   redemption price; (6) required them to pay monthly installments, of not
   less than P90, to be applied first to the satisfaction of the interest
   due and, the balance, on account of said price; (c) imposed upon said
   sisters the obligation to pay the taxes on said property, as
   well as the premium of the insurance policy on the house therein; and
   (d) stipulated that the amount of said policy, in case of collection
   thereof, “shall be applied” to the partial payment of the price above
   referred to. Appellant must have known that these stipulations are
   characteristic of a loan guaranteed by a mortgage, not of a conditional
   sale or an option to purchase. In either of the last two cases, the
   vendor or grantee of the option may redeem the property or exercise the
   option or not, in his discretion. Unless and until he has freely chosen to exercise either right, he is under no obligation to pay the amount stipulated or fixed by law. Much less is he obliged to pay interest thereon. Under Exhibit C, however, the Araullo sisters had no such discretion. Pursuant thereto, they were not only bound to pay said amount, with interest thereon, but, also, under obligation to make such payment in installments, of not less than P90.00 a month, immediately after
   the execution of said deed. In other words, Exhibit C granted the
   Araullo sisters no rights, but merely imposed upon them said
   obligations, thus constituting a clear notice to appellant that said
   sisters were mortgagors, and Hermogenes Martir, a mere mortgagee, of
   the property in question.

3. Appellant must have
   known that such was the status of the Araullos for they delivered to
   her and she received from them the aggregate sum of P1,260.00, by way
   of interests.

4. Although the period of eight (8)
   years stipulated in Exhibit C expired on October 27, 1946, Carmen
   Vasquez never demanded the delivery of the property in litigation.
   Under the second assignment of error, it is urged that the contract
   Exhibit D, between Hermogenes Martir and Carmen Vasquez, dated May 23,
   1940, was a pacto de retro sale, contrary to the finding of His Honor, the Trial Judge, who said:

“Con repecto a la escritura otorgada por el finado
Hermogenes Martir a favor de la demanda Carmen Vasquez en 23 de Mayo de
1940, que es el Exhibito ‘D’ de la estipulacion de hechos, las mismas
consideraciones anteriores deben tenerse en cuenta para concluir que,
si bien dicha escritura se titula ‘venta con pacto de retro’, la misma
no es mas que pura y simplemente una hipoteca, para garantizar el pago
de los P4,000 en ella expresados como consideration de su
otorgamiento.” (Record on Appeal, p. 106.)

We agree with this conclusion of the lower court, for had Carmen
Vasquez purchased the property in dispute, by virtue of Exhibit D, she
would have demanded delivery of said property upon the execution of the
instrument, as well as of the transfer certificates of title in the
name of Hermogenes Martir. Yet she did neither. Furthermore, she would
have filed an affidavit of consolidation of her title upon the
expiration of the period of redemption on May 23, 1942. This, she,
likewise, failed to do. She did not even explain the reason for her
inaction.

It is next contended, under her third assignment of error, that
Zacarias Jamelo should have been sentenced to turn over to appellant,
instead of to intervenor Gertrudis A. Martir, the sum of P825.00 paid
by the Araullos to Zacarias Jamelo. This pretense would be valid had
the contract between appellant and Hermogenes Martir been a sale
subject to redemption. But, as above stated, it was merely a loan
guaranteed by a mortgage. Accordingly, appellant’s contention is based
upon an erroneous predicate and can not be sustained.

Likewise, the fourth assignment of error is untenable upon the same
ground. The fifth assignment of error is merely a consequence of the
errors already disposed of. Further discussion thereof is, therefore,
unnecessary.

Recapitulating, it results that the property in question is
mortgaged to Hermogenes Martir, to guarantee the payment of the said
obligation of the Araullo sisters. The right of Hermogenes Martir on
said property, as mortgagee, is, in turn, subject to a first mortgage,
in favor of Carmen Vasquez, and a second mortgage, in favor of the
Jamelos. We note, however, that although payment of the obligation of
the Araullos, and in the event of default therein, foreclosure of the
mortgage constituted by them in favor of Hermogenes Martir, is directed
in the decision appealed from, nothing is said therein concerning the
settlement of the credit of Carmen Vasquez and that of the Jamelos,
insofar as the same affect the real rights of Hermogenes Martir over
the property in question. In the interest of justice and equity, and
considering that the pleadings filed by Carmen Vasquez and Zacarias
Jamelo clearly seek enforcement of their respective rights under
Exhibits D, G, and I, and that, whenever possible, multiplicity of
litigations should be avoided, we believe that appropriate measures
should be taken for the protection of those rights.

Consequently, the amount due to Hermogenes Martir from the
Araullos—whether it be paid by the plaintiff or realized by foreclosure
sale—should, instead of being delivered directly to the intervenor, be
deposited with the lower court, which, after due hearing, shall order
the disposition of said amount as follows: (1) it shall direct payment
of the credit of Carmen Vasquez; (2) from the balance, if any, it shall
direct payment of the credit of the Jamelos; and (3) the balance, if
any, shall be turned over to the intervenor.

Thus modified, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed in all
other respects, without special pronouncement as to costs. It is so
ordered.

Paras, C. J., Pablo, Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Jugo, Bautista Angelo and Labrador, JJ., concur.