This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2015-01-12 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| While it is well settled that factual issues are not within the province of this Court, as it is not a trier of facts and is not required to examine or contrast the oral and documentary evidence de novo, nevertheless, the Court has the authority to review and, in proper cases, reverse the factual findings of lower courts in these instances: (a) when the findings of fact of the trial court are in conflict with those of the appellate court; (b) when the judgment of the appellate court is based on misapprehension of facts; and (c) when the appellate court manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts which, if properly considered, would justify a different conclusion.[29] Considering that in the instant case, the findings of the CA are contrary to those of the RTC, a minute scrutiny by this Court is in order, and resort to duly proven evidence becomes necessary.[30] | |||||