Syquia v. Jacinto

BUTTE, J.:

On December 15, 1924, the Bank of the Philippine Islands obtained a judgment against Perfecto and Felipe Jacinto and Rafael Palma on a promissory note in its favor executed by the defendants on May 27, 1922, for the sum of P22,000 with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum plus 10 per cent of the principal as costs and attorney's fees. The dispositive part of this judgment is as follows: Se condena a los Sres. P. y F. Jacinto y Rafael Palma a que paguen a la parte demandante, los primeros como obligados principales y el ultimo como fiador, la suma de veinticuatro mil pesos (P24,000) al interes de 9 por ciento al año desde el 27 de mayo de 1923, mas el uno por ciento sobre el principal en concepto de honorarios de abogado y costas.

No debe expedirse ejecucion contra el demandado Sr. Rafael Palma, sino despues de haberse hecho excusion de los bienes de los senores P. y F. Jacinto. On August 16, 1928, the Bank of the Philippine Islands "in consideration of the sum of P1 and other valuable considerations" assigned and transferred said judgment to Gregorio Syquia.

On July 12, 1932, the widow of Gregorio Syquia, as administratrix of his estate, filed suit in the Court of First Instance of Manila against Perfecto and Felipe Jacinto and Rafael Palma reciting the aforementioned judgment and assignment and alleging that since the date of said judgment none of the defendants had paid anything thereon and there remains still due the sum of P24,000 with interest at 9 per cent since May 27, 1923. The plaintiff prayed that the judgment be revived and that defendants Perfecto and Felipe Jacinto as principal and Rafael Palma as guarantor be adjudged to pay the sum of P24,000 with interest since May 27, 1923, and costs. To this petition were attached a copy of the judgment of December 15, 1924, Exhibit A, and a copy of the assignment thereof to the plaintiff, Exhibit B. The defendants filed a joint amended answer in which they admitted the judgment, Exhibit A, and that said judgment had lapsed and it was necessary to revive the same; but they denied the assignment to Syquia and the allegation that nothing had been paid on said judgment and that the full amount thereof was still due.

They set up as a special defense that the judgment which the plaintiff was attempting to revive has been fully paid; that at the time of making the assignment to Gregorio Syquia, the bank had no right or interest under said judgment, the same having been fully paid, and that the partition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. In the same answer they set up a counter-demand to the following effect: that in the month of April, 925, the Bank of the Philippine Islands caused an execution to be issued under said judgment and the sheriff on the request of the bank sold at public sale three properties belonging to the defendants Jacinto which had been previously attached; that at said public sale three properties belonging to the defendants Jacinto which had been previously attached; that at said public sale the bank was the highest bidder crediting the amount of its bid on the said judgment; that said parcels of land with their improvements consisting of four houses yielded a monthly revenue of P880 or P10,560 a year; that during the year allowed the judgment debtors for redemption the said bank took control and possession of the said parcels of land and collected and retained the revenues thereof as aforesaid and that Gregorio Syquia has been receiving the same since that time, though without any right whatever; that the said revenues during the year of redemption in the sum of P10,560 were never applied by the bank as a credit on said judgment.

The defendants prayed that they be absolved from the demand of the petitioner and that the estate of Gregorio Syquia be condemned to pay the sum of P10,560 with costs. The answer concludes with a prayer for general relief. On the trial of this cause it was shown that at the execution sale held on April 18, 1925, the bank bought two of the properties of the defendants Jacinto for the sum of P15,045.

The third property was sold to Rufino Reyes for P1,000 which was not credited on the judgment debt pending the determination of Reyes' claim of priority. The trial court stated the judgment debt as of April 18, 1925, as follows: Loan .............................................................................................. P24,000.00 Interest from May 27, 1923 to April 1, 1925 at 9 per cent ...

4,083.29 Cost including sheriff's sale ..................................................... 657.95 Total obligation .........................................