PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 105 11/15/19, 10:28 PM
[No. L-13142. January 30, 1959.]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff and
appellee, vs. FELIX MANANSALA, accused and appellant.
Appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance of
Manila convicting appellant of falsification of official
document The falsification consists of altering the
duplicate copy of Traffic Violation Report (TVR)
previously issued to said accused, as a temporary
driver's permit, by erasing the originally written figure
"III" and the word "three" after the words "pending
cases" and by writing and superimposing thereon
number "I" and the word "one". The alterations thus
made changed the meaning of the said official document,
because by said alterations, it was made to appear that
accused had only one pending case of traffic violation
instead of three, as originally written on said document.
The practice was proved to be to arrest a driver who
commits a fourth traffic violation instead of merely
issuing to him a TVR, as is usually done for the first,
second and third violations. The accused had the
falsified TVR in his possession and had been using it as
a temporary driver's permit from its issuance to the time
he was caught committing a fourth traffic violation. It is
an established rule that when a person has in his
possession a falsified document and makes use of the
same, the presumption or inference is justified that such
person is the forger. (see U.S. vs. Viloria, 1 Phil. 682;
People vs. Lara, 45 Phil. 754; and People vs. Cu Unjieng,
61 Phil. 906). The circumstances, therefore, that accused
made use of and benefited from the
1254
falsified TVR is a strong evidence that he either himself
fal-sified it or caused the same to be falsified (U.S. vs.
Castillo, 6 Phil. 449), he being criminally responsible in
either case.
Judgment affirmed, with triple costs. Reyes, J.B.L., J.,
ponente.
··········
[No. L-13774. January 30, 1959.]
LEONIDES CHUNACO, ET AL., petitioners, vs. HON.
PERFECTO QUICHO, ET AL., respondents.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6f70e5eaf8e0e978003600fb002c009e/p/ASG801/?username=Guest Page 1 of 2
PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 105 11/15/19, 10:28 PM
Petition for certiorari with preliminary injunction seeking
to annul an order of the Court of First Instance of Albay
appointing a receiver under its Civil Case No. 1808 for
partition. The appointment of a receiver pendente lite
was sought on the ground that the managing co-owners
were unwisely administering the properties to the
detriment of the co-ownership. While in a partition
proceeding it is generally unnecessary for the court to
appoint a receiver, however, (as held in the case of
Tuason vs. Concepcion, 54 Phil. 408) where the relations
among the co-owners are strained, and no satisfactory
arrangement for administration can be accomplished,
the appointment of a receiver is not in abuse of
discretion. This ruling has been confirmed by Art. 492,
par. 3, of the new Civil Code authorizing the
appointment of an administrator (which term would
include a receiver) in cases where the action of the
majority co-owners results in serious prejudice to the
minority. There is no abuse of discretion in the order
complained of, and it is well established that only such
abuse would warrant interference by an appellate court
with an order granting receivership.
Order reversed. Concepción, J., ponente.
··········
© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6f70e5eaf8e0e978003600fb002c009e/p/ASG801/?username=Guest Page 2 of 2
