ARANETA v ARREGLADO (1958)
G.R. No. L-11394 September 9, 1958 MANUEL S. ARANETA, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. JUAN ARREGLADO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
G.R. No. L-11394 September 9, 1958 MANUEL S. ARANETA, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. JUAN ARREGLADO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
FACTS:
On March 7, 1951, while plaintiff Benjamin Araneta was talking with the other students of the Ateneo de Manila while seated atop a low
ruined wall bordering the Ateneo grounds along Dakota Street, in the City of Manila, Dario Arreglado, a former student of the Ateneo,
chanced to pass by. Those on the wall called Dario and conversed with him, and in the course of their talk, twitted him on his leaving
the Ateneo and enrolling in the De La Salle College. Apparently, Arreglado resented the banter and suddenly pulling from his pocket a
Japanese Lugar pistol (licensed in the name of his father Juan Arreglado), fired the same at Araneta, hitting him in the lower jaw, and
causing him to drop backward, bleeding profusely. Helped by his friends, the injured lad was taken first to the school infirmary and later
to the Singian Hospital, where he lay hovering between life and death for three days. The vigor of youth came to his rescue; he rallied
and after some time finally recovered, the gunshot wound left him with a degenerative injury to the jawbone (mandible) and a scar in the
lower portion of the face, where the bullet had plowed through. The behavior of Benjamin was likewise affected, he becoming inhibited
and morose after leaving the hospital.
Dario Arreglado was indicted for frustrated homicide (Criminal Case No. 15143, of Manila) and pleaded guilty; but in view of his youth, Dario being only 14 years of age, the court suspended the hearings as prescribed by Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code, and ordered him committed to the care of Mr. Deogracias Lerma, under the supervision of the Commissioner of Social Welfare, conformably to Republic Act No. 47. Because Arreglado observed proper conduct and discipline while on probation, the court, upon recommendation of the Social Welfare Administrator, finally discharged him on May 22, 1953, and quashed the criminal case.
Thereafter, on October 13, 1954, an action was instituted by Araneta and his father against Juan Arreglado, his wife, and their son, Dario, to recover material, moral and exemplary damages.
DECISION OF LOWER COURTS:
(1) CFI- Manila: sentencing defendants Juan Arreglado, his wife, and his son, Jose Dario Arreglado, to pay the former only P3,943 damages in lieu of the P112,000 claimed in the complaint.
ISSUE:
Whether petitioner are entitled to greater award for damages
RULING:
Yes.
We do not believe that plaintiffs-appellants should recover the cost of a plastic operation and surgical treatment in the United States, since their own experts asserted that the operation could be competently performed here by local practitioners. Still, taking into account the necessity and
cost of corrective measures to fully repair the damage; the pain suffered by the injured party; his feelings of inferiority due to consciousness of his present deformity, as well as the voluntary character of the injury inflicted; and further considering that a repair, however skillfully conducted, is never equivalent to the original state, we are of the opinion that the indemnity granted by the trial court should be increased to a total of P18,000.
Dario Arreglado was indicted for frustrated homicide (Criminal Case No. 15143, of Manila) and pleaded guilty; but in view of his youth, Dario being only 14 years of age, the court suspended the hearings as prescribed by Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code, and ordered him committed to the care of Mr. Deogracias Lerma, under the supervision of the Commissioner of Social Welfare, conformably to Republic Act No. 47. Because Arreglado observed proper conduct and discipline while on probation, the court, upon recommendation of the Social Welfare Administrator, finally discharged him on May 22, 1953, and quashed the criminal case.
Thereafter, on October 13, 1954, an action was instituted by Araneta and his father against Juan Arreglado, his wife, and their son, Dario, to recover material, moral and exemplary damages.
DECISION OF LOWER COURTS:
(1) CFI- Manila: sentencing defendants Juan Arreglado, his wife, and his son, Jose Dario Arreglado, to pay the former only P3,943 damages in lieu of the P112,000 claimed in the complaint.
ISSUE:
Whether petitioner are entitled to greater award for damages
RULING:
Yes.
We do not believe that plaintiffs-appellants should recover the cost of a plastic operation and surgical treatment in the United States, since their own experts asserted that the operation could be competently performed here by local practitioners. Still, taking into account the necessity and
cost of corrective measures to fully repair the damage; the pain suffered by the injured party; his feelings of inferiority due to consciousness of his present deformity, as well as the voluntary character of the injury inflicted; and further considering that a repair, however skillfully conducted, is never equivalent to the original state, we are of the opinion that the indemnity granted by the trial court should be increased to a total of P18,000.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment