Case Summary (G.R. No. L-23191)
Factual Background
Petitioner Geronimo G. Esguerra leased a portion of his building to respondent Isidro de Guzman for a ten-year term beginning July 12, 1961, with specified monthly rentals. De Guzman failed to pay rentals from February to August 1962 aggregating P1,800.00 and owed P300.00 as balance for equipment. On August 6, 1962, respondent Segunda de Guzman executed a promissory note for P2,100.00 payable in two installments, with a clause making the whole note due if the first installment was not paid when due.
Origin of the Two Actions
When none of the promissory note payments nor the rent arrears were paid, the Esguerras filed Civil Case No. 1074 against Mrs. Segunda de Guzman on September 11, 1962, to collect P2,100.00 with interest and attorney’s fees. Three days later Geronimo G. Esguerra filed Civil Case No. 1075 against Isidro de Guzman to recover unpaid rent for a specified period, future rent until vacation of the premises, liquidated damages of P2,000.00 as stipulated in the lease, and attorney’s fees. Writs of attachment issued in both cases.
Compromise Agreement and Approval
On October 22, 1962, the parties executed a compromise whereby both defendants admitted joint and several liability in the sum of P2,260.00 payable by November 26, 1962, and agreed that failure to perform would entitle plaintiffs to immediate judgment and execution against attached properties. Judge Felipe M. Villanueva approved the compromise in a judgment dated November 27, 1962, enjoining the parties to abide by its terms.
Execution and Alleged Satisfaction
The P2,260.00 was not paid by the stipulated date. On December 14, 1962, upon motion of the Esguerras, Judge Villanueva issued writs of execution in the two cases. Respondents alleged that through counsel Isidro de Guzman delivered P800.00 on December 13, 1962 and an additional P1,460.00 on January 5, 1963, and that receipt of those sums constituted full satisfaction of the judgment by compromise.
Lower Court Orders and Petition for Relief
Respondents moved on February 4, 1963 for the release of properties seized pursuant to the writs of attachment. Judge Villanueva granted the motion on February 11, 1963, and denied reconsideration on February 23, 1963. Thereafter, on February 28, 1963, the Esguerras filed Civil Case No. D-1450 in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan seeking certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with preliminary injunction to annul the February 11 and 23 orders, to restrain their enforcement, and to compel issuance of an alias writ of execution to satisfy the unpaid balance. The Court of First Instance dismissed the petition, prompting direct appeal on questions of law to the Supreme Court.
Issue on Appeal
The central legal issue was whether the Esguerras’ receipt of partial payments in the amounts of P800.00 and P1,460.00 constituted an acceptance of incomplete and irregular performance under Article 1235 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, thereby extinguishing the obligation or whether the Esguerras had manifested dissent such that the obligation remained enforceable and execution could proceed.
Respondents’ Position
Respondents contended that receipt of the two payments amounted to acceptance of performance within the meaning of Article 1235, and that because the Esguerras did not formally protest or object to the partial and irregular payment, the obligation must be deemed fully complied with and the attachments properly released.
Petitioners’ Position and Lower Court Finding
The petitioners asserted that they never assented to or regarded the payments as satisfactory performance of the obligation and that they immediately sought issuance of writs of execution. The Court of First Instance, however, dismissed their petition, effectively finding that the payments were accepted and that the obligation had been extinguished, a conclusion reviewed by the Supreme Court on points of law.
Supreme Court’s Legal Reasoning
The Court explained that the verb accept as used in Article 1235 means to take performance as satisfactory or sufficient, or to give assent to or agree to incomplete or irregular performance. Receipt of a partial payment does not ipso facto constitute acceptance. The Court observed that the Esguerras manifested lack of assent by promptly requesting issuance of writs of execution the day after the first payment, and by insisting on disposition of attached properties despite subsequent payments. The Court noted that Judge Villanueva was present when the first payment was m
...continue reading
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-23191)
Parties and Procedural Posture
- Geronimo G. Esguerra and Cristina G. Esguerra, Petitioners-Appellants, filed an action for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus with a preliminary injunction in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, docketed as Civil Case No. D-1450.
- The Honorable Felipe M. Villanueva, Municipal Judge of Dagupan City, Respondent-Appellee, was the judge whose orders granting release of attached properties and denying reconsideration were assailed.
- Isidro de Guzman and Segunda de Guzman, Respondents-Appellees, were judgment debtors whose properties had been attached and whose partial payments were relied upon to obtain release of the attachments.
- The Court of First Instance dismissed the petition and the petitioners appealed directly to the Supreme Court on questions purely of law.
- The opinion of the Supreme Court was delivered by Concepcion, C.J., which reversed the lower court's dismissal.
Key Factual Allegations
- Geronimo G. Esguerra leased a portion of the Esguerra-Gueco building to Isidro de Guzman for ten years beginning July 12, 1961, with rental P300 monthly until July 11, 1962, and P400 monthly thereafter, payable in advance within the first ten days of each month.
- Isidro de Guzman defaulted in rental payments from February to August 1962 aggregating P1,800 and owed P300 as balance of purchase of equipment from the Esguerras.
- On August 6, 1962, Segunda de Guzman executed a promissory note in favor of the Esguerras for P2,100 payable P1,000 not later than August 12, 1962 and P1,100 not later than August 31, 1962, with an acceleration clause if the first installment was not paid.
- For collection, the Esguerras filed Civil Case No. 1074 against Segunda de Guzman and Civil Case No. 1075 against Isidro de Guzman, and writs of attachment were issued in both cases.
- On October 22, 1962, the parties entered into a compromise agreement whereby the defendants admitted joint and several liability for P2,260 payable on or before November 26, 1962, and the compromise was approved by Judge Felipe M. Villanueva on November 27, 1962.
- The compromise sum was not paid by November 26, 1962, and on December 14, 1962 Judge Villanueva issued writs of execution at the motion of the Esguerras.
- Respondents thereafter caused payments of P800 on December 13, 1962, and P1,460 on January 5, 1963, to be delivered to the Esguerras, and on February 4, 1962 they filed a joint motion for release of the attached properties which Judge Villanueva granted on February 11, 1963, and denied reconsideration on February 23, 1963.
- The Esguerras filed the present petition on February 28, 1963 to annul the orders releasing the attachments and to compel issuance of an alias writ of execution for satisfaction of the unpaid balance.
Issues
- Whether the acceptance by the creditor of partial payments without formal protest extinguished the obligation under Article 1235 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
- Whether the