FACTS:

The Davao Saw Mill Co., Inc., operates a sawmill. However, the land upon which the business was conducted belonged to another person. On the land the sawmill company erected a building which housed the machinery used by it. Some of the machines were placed and mounted on foundations of cement. In the contract of lease between the sawmill company and the owner of the land there appeared the following provision:

That on the expiration of the period agreed upon, all the improvements and buildings introduced and erected by the lessee shall pass to the exclusive ownership of the lessor without any obligation on its part to pay any amount for said improvements and buildings; also, in the event the lessee should leave or abandon the land leased before the time herein stipulated, the improvements and buildings shall likewise pass to the ownership of the lessor as though the time agreed upon had expired: Provided, however, That the machineries and accessories are not included in the improvements which will pass to the lessor on the expiration or abandonment of the land leased.

In another action, wherein Davao Saw Mill was the defendant, a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff in that action against the defendant in that action; a writ of execution issued thereon, and the properties now in question were levied upon as personalty by the sheriff.

Davao Saw Mill has on a number of occasions treated the machinery as personal property by executing chattel mortgages in favor of third persons. One of such persons is the appellee by assignment from the original mortgages.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the machinery in dispute is a personal property.

 

RULING:

Article 334, paragraphs 1 and 5, of the Civil Code, is in point. According to the Code, real property consists of —

1. Land, buildings, roads and constructions of all kinds adhering to the soil;

x x x           x x x           x x x

5. Machinery, liquid containers, instruments or implements intended by the owner of any building or land for use in connection with any industry or trade being carried on therein and which are expressly adapted to meet the requirements of such trade of industry.

Appellant emphasizes the first paragraph, and appellees the last mentioned paragraph.

While not conclusive, the characterization of the property as chattels by the appellant is indicative of intention and impresses upon the property the character determined by the parties.

It is machinery which is involved; moreover, machinery not intended by the owner of any building or land for use in connection therewith, but intended by a lessee for use in a building erected on the land by the latter to be returned to the lessee on the expiration or abandonment of the lease.

Machinery which is movable in its nature only becomes immobilized when placed in a plant by the owner of the property or plant, but not when so placed by a tenant, a usufructuary, or any person having only a temporary right, unless such person acted as the agent of the owner.

“Machinery, vessels, instruments or implements intended by the owner of the tenements for the industrial or works that they may carry on in any building or upon any land and which tend directly to meet the needs of the said industry or works.”

Machinery which is movable in its nature only becomes immobilized when placed in a plant by the owner of the property or plant. Such result would not be accomplished, therefore, by the placing of machinery in a plant by a tenant or a usufructuary or any person having only a temporary right.