Title
Philippine National Bank vs. Maza
Case
G.R. No. 24224
Decision Date
Nov 3, 1925
The court upheld the Philippine National Bank's entitlement to payment on promissory notes, rejecting the defendants' claims as accommodation parties and their request to add another party as a defendant.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 24224)

Facts:

  • The case involves the Philippine National Bank (PNB) as the plaintiff and Ramon Maza and Francisco Mecenas as the defendants.
  • The dispute centers on five promissory notes, each worth ten thousand pesos (P10,000), signed by Maza and Mecenas.
  • The first two notes were signed on January 20, 1921, with a maturity of three months, while the remaining three were executed on January 21, 1921, maturing four months later.
  • The notes were payable to the order of the Philippine National Bank in Iloilo.
  • By September 22, 1924, the total amount due, including interest, was P65,207.73.
  • PNB filed a lawsuit in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo to recover the owed amounts.
  • Maza and Mecenas claimed the notes were sent to them blank by Enrique Echaus, who requested their signatures for potential negotiation.
  • They argued they had not negotiated the notes or received value, asserting Echaus was the real party in interest.
  • The trial court denied their motion to add Echaus as a defendant and ruled in favor of PNB, ordering Maza and Mecenas to pay the total amount due, interest, and costs.
  • The defendants appealed, citing four errors, including the refusal to compel Echaus to join the case.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The court ruled that the trial court did not err in refusing to require Enrique Echaus to become a party to the action, as the defendants failed to properly except to the order and Echaus was not an indispensable party.
  • Maza and Mecenas were found liable for the amounts stated in the promissory notes, as they admitted the genuineness and due execution of the instruments.
  • The court held that the defense of...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The court's decision was based on principles of agency and the nature of negotiable instruments.
  • Maza and Mecenas, as signatories of the promissory notes, had a primary and unconditional obligation to fulfill their commitments, regardless of their claims regardi...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.