OROSA VS.

CA
329 SCRA

Replevin
 Whether or not the order
of the RTC to return the
ISSUE: subject motor vehicle was
proper?
  No.
 To sustain the trial court's decision would amount to unjust
enrichment. The Court of Appeals was correct when it instead
ordered private respondent to return, not the car itself, but only
the amount equivalent to the fourteen installments actually paid
with interest.
RULING  Note: (This provision is not mentioned in the case)
Rule 60, Sec. 9. Judgment. After trial of the issues, the court shall
: determine who has the right of possession to and the value of the
property and shall render judgment in the alternative for the
delivery thereof to the party entitled to the same, or for its value in
case delivery cannot be made, and also for such damages as either
party may prove, with costs.