CONCLPCION CHUA GAW v.

SUY BLN CHUA and ILLISA CHUA

G.R. No. J608SS, J6 April 2008, 1HIRD DIVISION, (Nachura, J.)

1bat tbe ritve.. i. tbe aarer.e art, aoe. vot vece..arit, veav tbat tbe cattivg art, ritt vo be bovva b, tbe
forver`. te.tivov,. 1be fact revaiv. tbat it ra. at bi. iv.tavce tbat bi. aarer.ar, ra. vt ov tbe ritve.. .tava. |vti/e av
oraivar, ritve.., tbe cattivg art, va, iveacb av aarer.e ritve.. iv att re.ect. a. if be baa beev cattea b, tbe aarer.e
art,, ecet b, eriaevce of bi. baa cbaracter. |vaer a rvte ervittivg tbe iveacbvevt of av aarer.e ritve.., attbovgb tbe
cattivg art, aoe. vot rovcb for tbe ritve..` reracit,, be i. vovetbete.. bovva b, bi. te.tivov, if it i. vot covtraaictea or
revaiv. vvrebvttea.

Spouses Chua Chin and Chan Chi were the ounders o three business enterprises namely:
lagonoy Lumber, Capitol Sawmill Corporation, and Columbia \ood Industries. 1he couple had seen
,, children, namely, Santos Chua, Concepcion Chua, Suy Ben Chua, Chua Suy Phen, Chua Sioc luan,
Chua Suy Lu, and Julita Chua. \hen Chua Chin died he let his wie Chan Chi and his children as his
only suriing heirs. At the time o his death, the net worth o lagonoy Lumber was P415,48.20. On
December 8, 1986, his suriing heirs executed a Deed o Lxtra-Judicial Partition and Renunciation o
lereditary Rights in laor o a Co-leir ,Deed o Partition,, wherein the heirs settled their interest in
lagonoy Lumber. In said document, Chan Chi and the six children likewise agreed to oluntarily
renounce and waie their shares oer lagonoy Lumber in aor o their co-heir, Chua Sioc luan.

In May 1988, petitioner Concepcion Chua Gaw and her husband, Antonio Gaw ,Spouses Gaw,,
asked respondent Suy Ben Chua, to lend them P200,000.00 which they will use or the construction o
their house in Marilao, Bulacan. 1he parties agreed that the loan will be payable within six ,6, months
without interest. Suy Ben issued a check in the amount o P200,000.00 to the couple. loweer, the
latter ailed to pay the amount within the designated period. Suy Ben sent them a demand letter,
requesting to settle their obligation with the warning that he will take the appropriate legal action i they
ail to do so. lailing to heed his demand, Suy Ben iled a Complaint or Sum o Money against the
spouses Gaw with the Regional 1rial Court ,R1C,.

During trial, the spouses Gaw called the Suy Ben to testiy as aderse witness under Section 10,
Rule 132. On direct examination, Suy Ben testiied that lagonoy Lumber was the conjugal property o
his parents Chua Chin and Chan Chi, who were both Chinese citizens. le narrated that, initially, his
ather leased the lots where lagonoy Lumber is presently located rom his godather, Lu Pieng, and that
his ather constructed the two-storey concrete building standing thereon. According to Suy Ben, when
he was in high school, it was his ather who managed the business but he and his other siblings were
helping him. Later, his sister, Sioc luan, managed logonoy Lumber together with their other brothers
and sisters. le stated that he also managed lagonoy Lumber when he was in high school, but he
stopped when he got married and ound another job. le said that he now owns the lots where lagonoy
Lumber is operating.

On cross-examination, Concepcion explained that he ceased to be a stockholder o Capitol
Sawmill when he sold his shares o stock to the other stockholders on January 1, 1991. le urther
testiied that Sioc luan acquired lagonoy Lumber by irtue o a Deed o Partition, executed by the
heirs o Chua Chin. le, in turn, became the owner o lagonoy Lumber when he bought the same rom
Sioc luan through a Deed o Sale dated August 1, 1990.

On re-direct examination, Concepcion stated
that he sold his shares o stock in Capitol Sawmill or P254,000.00, which payment he receied in cash.
le also paid the purchase price o P255,000.00 or lagonoy Lumber in cash, which payment was not
coered by a separate receipt as he merely deliered the same to Sioc luan at her house in Paso de Blas,
Valenzuela. Although he maintains seeral accounts at Planters Bank, Paluwagan ng Bayan, and China
Bank, the amount he paid to Sioc luan was not taken rom any o them. le kept the amount in the
house because he was engaged in rediscounting checks o people rom the public market.


Prior to the R1C Decision Antonio died due to cardio ascular and respiratory ailure.
1hereater R1C ruled in aor o Suy Ben declaring that the latter is entitled to the payment o the
amount o P200,000.00 with interest. Concepcion appealed to the Court o Appeals ,CA,. 1he CA
airmed the decision o the R1C. 1he CA denied Concepcion`s motion or reconsideration or lack o
merit. lence, this Petition or Reiew on Certiorari with the Supreme Court ,SC,.

Concepcion contends that her case was unduly prejudiced by the R1C`s treatment o the Suy
Ben`s testimony as aderse witness during cross-examination by his own counsel as part o her eidence.
Concepcion argues that the aderse witness` testimony elicited during cross-examination should not be
considered as eidence o the calling party.


ISSUL:

\hether or not the aderse witness` testimony elicited during cross-examination should be
considered as eidence o the calling party

HLLD:

Petition DLNILD.

A party who calls his adersary as a witness is, thereore, not bound by the latter`s testimony
only in the sense that he may contradict him by introducing other eidence to proe a state o acts
contrary to what the witness testiies on. A rule that proides that the party calling an aderse witness
shall not be bound by his testimony does not mean that such testimony may not be gien its proper
weight, but merely that the calling party shall not be precluded rom rebutting his testimony or rom
impeaching him. 1his, Concepcion ailed to do.

In the present case, Concepcion, by her own testimony, ailed to discredit the Suy Ben`s
testimony on how lagonoy Lumber became his sole property. 1he petitioner admitted haing signed
the Deed o Partition but she insisted that the transer o the property to Sioc luan was only temporary.
On cross-examination, she conessed that no other document was executed to indicate that the transer
o the business to Sioc luan was a temporary arrangement. She declared that, ater their mother died in
1993, she did not initiate any action concerning lagonoy Lumber, and it was only in her counterclaim in
the instant that, or the irst time, she raised a claim oer the business.

Due process requires that in reaching a decision, a tribunal must consider the entire eidence
presented. All the parties to the case, thereore, are considered bound by the aorable or unaorable
eects resulting rom the eidence. As already mentioned, in arriing at a decision, the entirety o the
eidence presented will be considered, regardless o the party who oered them in eidence. In this light,
the more ital consideration is not whether a piece o eidence was properly attributed to one party, but
whether it was accorded the apposite probatie weight by the court. 1he testimony o an aderse witness
is eidence in the case and should be gien its proper weight, and such eidence becomes weightier i the
other party ails to impeach the witness or contradict his testimony.