SANTOS vs BERNABE

FACTS:
Santos deposited 778 cavans and 38 kilos of palay in the warehouse of Bernabe. At the same time,
Tiongson also deposited 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of palay. The share of Tiongson and Santos were mixed
together and cannot be separated. Later on and for some unknown reason, Tiongson files a case against
Bernabe to recover the 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of palay deposited in Bernabe’s warehouse. So Tiongson
files for a petition for a writ of attachment and the Court granted it. Bernabe’s properties were attached,
including only 924 cavans of rice and 31 ½ kilos of palay. These were sold at a public auction and the
proceeds were delivered to Tiongson. Santos tried to intervene in the attachment of the palay but then the
sheriff had already proceeded with the attachment, so Santos files a complaint. He says that Tiongson
cannot claim the 924 cavans of palay; he says that by asking for the attachment of the properties,
Tiongson is claiming that the cavans of rice all belonged to Bernabe and not to him.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Tiongson can claim the 924 cavans of rice as his own.
RULING:
No, both Tiongson and Santos must divide the cavans and palay proportionately.

The cavans belonging to Santos, having been mixed with those belonging to Tiongson, the following rule
prescribed is Article 381 of the Civil Code: “If, by will of one of their owners, two things of identical or
dissimilar nature are mixed, or if the mixture occurs accidentally, if in the latter case, the things cannot be
separated without injury, each owner shall acquire a right in the mixture proportionate to the part
belonging to him, according to the value of the things mixed or comingled.”

The number of kilos in a cavan not having been determined, the Court took the proportion only of the 924
cavans of palay which were attached andsold, therby giving Santos, who deposited 778 cavans, 398.49
and Tiongson, who deposited 1,026 cavans, 525.51, or the value thereof at the rate of 3Php per cavan.