Harold vs. Aliba GR. No. 190864/October 2, 2007 Quisumbing, J. FACTS: ‘Sometime in January 1993, Maria L. Harold engaged the services of respondent Agapite T. Aliba, a geadetic engineer, to conduct relocation survey and to execute a consolidation-subdivision of her properties including that of her sister, Alles Laruan, located in Pieo, La Trinidad, Benguet. After completing is work, Aliba was paid P4,050 for his services, but he failed to retum the certificates of lila of the said properties for mora than one year, despite repeated demands to return them. ‘Sometime in January 1984, Aliba prevailed upon Harold and her husband ta sign a document which was supposedly needed to facilitate the consolidation-subdivision and the issuance of separate transfer certificates of lille over the properties. Harold and her husband signed the document without reading it Thereafter, on April 18, 1994, a truck loaded with G.1. sheets and construction materials cama to the subject lot owned by Harold Htumed out that Alisa had gold the lol toa third persom and the allaged daed of sale was tha document that Aiba caused Harold and her husband to sign in January 1994, On several oocasions, Aliba tried to convince Harold to accept the sum of P400,000 which was later on increased ta P500,000, a8 purchase price of the said lot. Harold agreed to accept the P500,000 tron Alita but only a8 partial payment, considering that the lot has an aggregate value of P1,338,000. On the same date, Harold was made to sign an acknowledgment receipt and other papers which vere made to appear that Harold accepted the sum of P480,000 as full and final payment forthe lot. The dispute between Harold and Aliba was referred ta Punong Barangay Limson Ogas and the Lupong Tagapamayapa. During the Juna 8, 1994 barangay caneiliation proceedings, the parties agreed that Alba wil pay an additional amount ef P75 000 te the initial PS00,000 Aliba had already given te Harold. In the same proceedings, Aliba tendered P70,000 which was evidenced by an acknowledgment receipt signed by the partias , attested to by the Lupon chairman, and witnassed by several barangay officials. Alita tendered the remaining P5000 to Harold to complete their arricable selliement, Unfortunately, Harold refused to acceptthe same, saying that P5,000 is nol enough and insisted on the elevation of the caseto the court Thus, a cedtifcation to file action was issued by the Oifice of the Lupong Tagapamayapa. Harold fled a Complaint against Alba before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of La Trinidad, Benguet The MTC issued an Order dismissing Harold's complaint, The courtheld that Mrs. Harold reneged on the agreement, saying P75,000 is not enough, then insisted that the case be filed in court, but atthe same time refusing to retum the P70,000, when defendant tried to collect it back. Consequently, the issuance of the Certificate to File Action, is improper because no valid repudiation of the amicable settament was made.Onappeal, the RTC affirmed in foto the assailed Order af the MTC. The Court of Appeals denied the appeal of Harcid. Hence, this patition. ISSUE: Whether or not Harold is barred from pursuing her case against Alita under the principle af estoppels RULING: Under Article 1431 of the Civil Code, through esteppel, an admission or representation is rendered conclusive upon the person making it, and eannot be denied or disproved as against the person ralying on it. Where a party, by his deed or conduct, has induced another to actin a particular manner, estoppel effectively bars the former from adopting an incansistent position, attitude or course of conduct that causes loss or injury to the latter. Harold exprassly acknovrledged that the offer made by Aliba to pay an additional P75,000 was made in order for her te desist from pursuing her case against him. By reason of her unconditional acceptance of the offer and the P70,000 tendered to her, Harold had already effectively waived whatever claims che might have against Aliba regarding the subject lot, Mereavar, che is lkewice barred from pursuing her case against Aliba under the principle of estoppel now. Wherefore, the petition is denied for lack of merit. The decisian af the Court of Appeals in denying Harold's appeal is hereby affirmed.