G.R. No. L-23191 December 19, 1967
GERONIMO G. ESGUERRA and CRISTINA G. ESGUERRA, petitioners-appellants, vs. THE HON. FELIPE M. VILLANUEVA, Municipal Judge of Dagupan City, THE PROVINCE SHERIFF OF PANGASINAN, ISIDRO DE GUZMAN and SEGUNDA DE GUZMAN, respondents-appellees.

FACTS

Petitioners Geronimo G. Esguerra and his wife Cristina (the Esguerras) leased a portion of their building to respondent Isidro de Guzman (De Guzman) for ten years. Due to De Guzman’s failure to pay rentals and a balance on equipment, his mother, respondent Segunda de Guzman (Mrs. De Guzman), executed a promissory note in favor of the Esguerras for P2,100.00. Upon non-payment, the Esguerras filed two separate collection cases in the Municipal Court of Dagupan City: Civil Case No. 1074 against Mrs. De Guzman for the promissory note amount, and Civil Case No. 1075 against De Guzman for unpaid rentals and other sums. Writs of attachment were issued. The parties entered into a compromise agreement, approved by respondent Judge Felipe M. Villanueva in a judgment dated November 27, 1962, wherein the De Guzmans admitted joint and several liability for P2,260.00 payable on or before November 26, 1962. The agreement stipulated that upon failure to pay, judgment would be rendered immediately for the full amounts claimed in the original complaints and execution would issue on the attached properties. The P2,260.00 was not paid by the deadline. On the Esguerras’ motion, Judge Villanueva issued writs of execution on December 14, 1962. Subsequently, De Guzman, through counsel, delivered P800.00 on December 13, 1962, and P1,460.00 on January 5, 1963, to Esguerra. Claiming these payments constituted full satisfaction of the judgment, the De Guzmans filed a joint motion for the release of their attached properties, which Judge Villanueva granted on February 11, 1963. The Esguerras’ motion for reconsideration was denied. The Esguerras then filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan to annul the orders releasing the attachment and to compel the issuance of an alias writ of execution. The lower court dismissed the petition, holding that the Esguerras’ receipt of the partial payments without protest constituted acceptance and full satisfaction under Article 1235 of the Civil Code.

ISSUE

Whether the Esguerras’ receipt of the partial payments of P800.00 and P1,460.00, without formal protest, constituted an acceptance that deemed the obligation under the compromise judgment fully complied with pursuant to Article 1235 of the Civil Code.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of First Instance. The Court held that the verb “accept” in Article 1235 of the Civil Code means to take as satisfactory or sufficient or to give assent to an incomplete or irregular performance. The circumstances clearly showed the Esguerras did not assent to the partial payments as sufficient compliance. The day after the first payment, the Esguerras asked Judge Villanueva to issue the writs of execution, manifesting their dissatisfaction and implied objection. Judge Villanueva’s issuance of the writs and the De Guzmans’ subsequent second payment further indicated that the partial performance was not accepted as full satisfaction. The law does not require a protest in a particular manner or time; it is sufficient if the creditor’s acts, at the time of payment or within a reasonable time thereafter, show they are not agreeable to it. The Esguerras’ acts met this standard. Therefore, the obligation was not extinguished, and respondent Judge was directed to issue the corresponding alias writs of execution.