G.R. No. L-23699 December 18, 1967
JUANITO CHAN, petitioner, vs. GREGORIO B. MONTEJO, Judge, Court of First Instance, Zamboanga City; and JESUSA VDA. DE MURGA, respondents.

FACTS

On March 19, 1959, respondent Jesusa Vda. de Murga filed an unlawful detainer case against petitioner Juanito Chan before the Municipal Court of Zamboanga City to recover possession of two leased parcels of land. The lease contract, effective for ten years from January 31, 1949, contained a clause (clause 7) granting Murga an option to purchase Chan’s buildings upon expiration. If Murga did not exercise this option, the lease would be automatically renewed, with the renewal period and rental to be adjusted by the parties. After the lease expired, the parties attempted to negotiate a new rental but failed to agree. Murga then filed the ejectment case. The Municipal Court rendered a decision on February 12, 1964, ordering Chan to vacate the lots, remove his improvements, pay a monthly rental of P600.00 from February 1, 1959, until he vacates, pay attorney’s fees, and costs. Chan appealed to the Court of First Instance. During the appeal, Murga filed a motion for execution of the Municipal Court’s judgment, alleging that although Chan had filed a supersedeas bond and was paying the original contract’s rental of P500.00 monthly, he failed to deposit the difference of P100.00 monthly (the difference between the contract’s P500.00 and the judgment’s P600.00) for the months February to July 1964 within the first ten days of each month. Chan opposed, arguing the lease was subject to automatic renewal and he had been paying P500.00 monthly, which Murga accepted up to July 1964. Chan deposited the total accumulated difference of P600.00 for the six months on July 10, 1964. The respondent Judge granted the motion for execution, finding Chan’s failure to deposit the full adjudged rent fatal. Chan then filed this petition for certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the failure of the defendant (Chan) to pay or deposit the sum of P100.00 every month (the difference between the stipulated rental and the adjudged rental) from February to July 1964, while having paid the plaintiff (Murga) the stipulated rental of P500.00 monthly for the same period, warrants the execution of the Municipal Court’s judgment pending appeal.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court granted the writ, set aside the respondent Judge’s order, and made the preliminary injunction permanent. Although Sections 8 and 9 of Rule 72 require a tenant to pay or deposit the rent determined in the decision on or before the 10th day of each month to stay execution, this right can be waived by the landlord. The facts show that Murga, acceding to Chan’s plea, accepted the monthly payments of P500.00 (the stipulated rental) up to July 1964 without demanding the P100.00 difference. This conduct implicitly constituted an acceptance of Chan’s plea to pay only P500.00 monthly instead of the adjudged P600.00, thereby waiving the right to demand the full judgment amount for the purpose of staying execution. Since Chan deposited the total difference of P600.00 on July 10, 1964, Murga suffered no material damage. Equity should be extended to Chan, who acted in good faith and would suffer irreparable damage (demolition of his buildings valued at no less than P70,000.00) if execution proceeded.