Case Digest: DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROMEO TESTON 545 SCRA 422 (2008)

DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROMEO TESTON 545 SCRA 422 (2008)

By virtue of a Deed of Conditional Sale, Romeo Teston purchased, on installment basis, two (2) parcels of land situated in Masbate, Teston from Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP). Teston defaulted in the payment of his amortizations. Consequently, DBP rescinded their contract of conditional sale. DBP thereafter transferred the two (2) parcels of land to the government. It was subsequently found out that Teston had also voluntarily offered the two parcels of land for inclusion in the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) under the Voluntary Offer to Sell. Teston filed before the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) a Petition against DBP alleging that under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, Republic Act No. 6657, DBP‘s right to rescind the sale was extinguished by operation of law. The DARAB Regional Adjudicator dismissed Teston‘s petition on the ground that Teston has never been the owner of the land, hence could not have validly offered the property under the Voluntary Offer to Sell scheme. On appeal, the DARAB affirmed the Regional Adjudicators decision. The Court of Appeals modified the Trial Court‘s decision by ordering DBP to return to Teston the P1,000,000 downpayment paid by Teston without requiring the latter to present evidence. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in modifying DARAB‘s decision ordering DBP to return to Teston the P1,000,000 downpayment allegedly paid by Teston 

HELD:

It is elementary that a judgment must conform to, and be supported by, both the pleadings and the evidence, and must be in accordance with the theory of the action on which the pleadings are framed and the case was tried. The judgment must be secudum allegata et probata. Due process considerations justify this requirement. It is improper to enter an order which exceeds the scope of relief sought by the pleadings, absent notice which affords the opposing party an opportunity to be heard with respect to the proposed relief. The fundamental purpose of the requirement that allegations of a complaint must provide the measure of recovery is to prevent surprise to the defendant. To require DBP to return the alleged P1,000,000 without first giving it an opportunity to present evidence would violate the Constitutional provision that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty,or property without due process of law. The essence of due process is to be found in the reasonable opportunity to be heard and submit any evidence one may have in support of ones defense.