4/30/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly two of Ishwar's brothers, Choithram Jethmal Ramnani and Navalrai Jethmal Ramnani, as their attorneys-in-fact. Choithram decided to invest in the real estate business. On February 1, 1966 and May 16, 1966, Choithram, in his capacity as attorney-in-fact of Ishwar, bought two parcels of land located in Barrio Ugong, Pasig, Rizal from Ortigas & Company, Ltd. Partnership (Ortigas, for short) and had buildings constructed thereon. Through the industry and genius of Choithram, Ishwar's property was developed and improved into a valuable asset worth millions of pesos. Unfortunately, Choithram, while showing himself to be a good manager, proved unfaithful to the trust reposed in him by spouses Ishwar. Without their knowledge, Choithram started to appropriate his brother's property and other assets as his own. In 1973, upon complete payments of Ishwar's lots which he purchased from Ortigas, Choithram caused the latter to execute the corresponding deeds of sale in favor of his daughter-in-law, Nirmla. Eventually, TCT Nos. 403150 and 403152 were issued by the Registry of Deeds of Rizal in her favor. Choithram also donated 2,500 shares of stock in a garment corporation to his children. He also fraudulently mortgaged $3,000,000.00 worth of the spouses' property to "Overseas Holding Co." Records show that the $3,000,000.00 mortgage was executed on June 20, 1989, or 6 days before the corporation was organized. Spouses Ishwar learned what Choithram was doing. Hence, they asked him to render an accounting, but there was none forthcoming. They then revoked Choithram's general power of attorney. He earnestly pleaded in writing to Ishwar to issue another power of attorney, but to no avail. Choithram repudiated all well-meaning efforts to solve the controversy within the Ramnani family. Moreover, he denied the genuine nature of the trust relationship between him and his brother Ishwar. Agitated, spouses Ishwar filed on October 6, 1982 with the Court of First Instance of Rizal a complaint for reconveyance and damages against Choithram and his son Moti and daughter-in-law Nirmla (Choithram family for short). Ironically, the CFI dismissed the complaint and recognized Choithram's full ownership of the questioned two parcels of land. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, finding that spouses Ishwar entrusted capital to Choithram to be invested in the Philippines. The appellate court held the Choithram family and Ortigas jointly and severally liable to spouses Ishwar. Subsequently, the Court of Appeals modified its earlier decision by dismissing the case against Ortigas. Both parties appealed to this Court. In G.R. No. 85494, the Choithram family vigorously asserted their right of ownership over the disputed lots, while in G.R. No. 85496, spouses Ishwar faulted the Court of Appeals in dismissing the case against Ortigas. In the meantime, Choithram continued to dissipate Ishwar's assets. https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/52364 2/9