Case Summary (G.R. No. 45486)
Background of the Case
- The corporation "Devota de Nuestra Seora de la Correa" was established in 1920 for a twenty-year period to promote the fishing industry.
- An investigation revealed that Eugenio Valencia, the corporation's manager, had withdrawn P600 from its assets.
- A petition for voluntary dissolution was filed on September 26, 1927, leading to the court's approval of dissolution and the appointment of Damaso P. Nicolas as assignee for liquidation on February 14, 1928.
Actions Taken by the Assignee
- Damaso P. Nicolas demanded payment of the P600 from Eugenio Valencia on December 7 and 13, 1928.
- Valencia promised to pay the amount in May 1929 but only paid P200, leaving a balance of P400.
- After Nicolas resigned, Tiburcio Sumera was appointed as the new assignee and filed a motion for Valencia to pay the remaining P400.
Court Proceedings and Initial Rulings
- The Court of First Instance of Bulacan denied Sumera's motion on March 5, 1936, but allowed him to bring a proper action.
- On June 6, 1936, Sumera filed a complaint against Valencia for the recovery of P400, plus interest and indemnity, based on Valencia's admission of the debt.
- Valencia denied the allegations and claimed the obligation had been fully paid, counterclaiming for damages.
Trial and Judgment
- During the trial, the parties stipulated that Valencia admitted the genuineness of the debt and that he had paid P200, leaving P400 unpaid.
- The court ruled on October 14, 1936, ordering Valencia to pay the P400 with legal interest and dismissing his counterclaim.
- Valencia subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that the action had prescribed under section 77 of Act No. 1459.
Amendment of Judgment and Appeal
- The court amended its judgment on November 2, 1936, agreeing with Valencia that the action had prescribed, leading to the dismissal of Sumera's case.
- Sumera appealed, claiming the court erred in its amendment and dismissal based on the prescription argument.
Timeliness of the Appeal
- The appeal's timeliness was scrutinized, with the court noting that Sumera filed a motion for reconsideration within the allowable period after receiving notice of the amended judgment.
- The court determined that the appeal was timely, as the procedural requirements were met.
Legal Interpretation of Section 77 of Act No. 1459
- Section 77 allows a corporation to continue for three years post-dissolution for legal actions and asset liquidation.
- Section 78 permits the convey...continue reading