[No. L-8420.

May 31, 1956]

LUCENA MASICLAT, ET AL., petitioner, vs. NATALIA

CENTENO, respondent.

Appeal by certiorari from the decision of the Court of

Appeals reversing the judgment of the Court of First
Instance of Pampanga and awarding the rice in question
to the defendant.

1044

The appealed decision is correct, first, because the evidence

does not clearly show the identity of the pferson who tried
to buy the rice from the respondent, and neither does it
show that the same person was the one who sold the
commodity to Ramon Masiclat; and, second, although a
cojitraet of sale is perfected upon the parties having agreed
as to the thing which is the subject matter of the contract
and the price (Warner, Barnes & Co. vs. Inza, 43 Phil., 505;
Article 1475, Civil Code), ownership is not considered
transmitted until the property is actually delivered and the
purchaser has taken possession thereof and has paid the
price agreed upon (Roman vs. Grimalt, 6 Phil., 96; Article
1524, Civil Code).
Judgment appealed from affirmed, without pronouncement
as to costs. Paras, C. J.y ponente.

____________

© Copyright 2014 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.