You are on page 1of 1

Sanchez v. Rigos; GR No.

L-25494, June 14, 1972


Petitioner: Nicolas Sanchez
Respondent: Severina Rigos
FACTS:
Mrs. Rigos executed an instrument Option to Purchase in favor of
Sanchez whereby Mrs. Rigos agreed, promised and committed x x x to sell for
a sum of P1,510.00 a parcel of land in San Jose, Nueva Ecija within 2 years from
the date of the understanding, after which the option would be deemed
terminated and elapsed if Sanchez shall fail to exercise his right to buy the
property
Several tenders of payment of the sum of P1,510 were made by Sanchez
but rejected by Rigos. The former deposited the amount with the CFI of Nueva
Ecija and commenced against the latter an action for specific performance and
damages.
Rigos alleged as a defense that the contract was a unilateral promise to
sell, and the same being unsupported by any valuable consideration, by force of
the New Civil Code, is null and void.

ISSUE: W/N Mrs. Rigos has an obligation to sell reciprocally demandable by


Sanchez under Art. 1479

HELD: No. Plaintiff alleges that the promise to sell in the contract is reciprocally
demandable. While Rigos had really agreed, promised, and committed to sell
the land to Sanchez, Sanchez in turn had not agreed and committed himself to
buy the property. The instrument is not a contract to sell, but merely an option
for Sanchez to buy. As an option to buy there had been a price for the purchase
of the property, but there was nothing in the contract to indicate a promise and
undertaking supported by a consideration distinct from the purchase price for the
sale of the land, as required by Art. 1479 in a unilateral promise to sell. The
promisee having the burden of proving such consideration, Sanchez failed to
allege the existence of such in his complaint.

There may be no valid contract without a cause or consideration. The promisor is


not bound by his promise and may withdraw it.