8. A sold a specific car to B for Php 800,000.00 payable in two equal monthly installments with the agreement that ownership will pass to the buyer only upon full payment of the price. The car was then delivered to B. Before B could pay the initial payment, the car was hit by a lightning resulting to its total wreck. B then informed A of the incident and that he is no longer paying the purchase price. He posited that as A is the owner of the car, he (A) should bear the loss pursuant to the principle of "res perit domino". A countered that the contract of sale they entered into created a reciprocal obligation, being so, since the cause of the loss of the car was a fortuitous event, his obligation to deliver the specific car to B is already extinguished; but the obligation of B to comply with his obligation, that is payment of the purchase price, is not extinguished. Moreover, according to A, the obligation of B is to deliver money which is generic thing subsists pursuant to the principle of "genus nunquam perit" or generic thing never perishes; hence, B should still pay the purchase price. Between A and B, who is legally correct? reason.