GR L 10928; (April, 1918) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-10928; April 1, 1918
GLICERIA MARELLA, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. AGRIPINO AGONCILLO, judicial administrator of the estate of Felisa Ariola, deceased, defendant-appellant.
FACTS:
The plaintiffs, Gliceria Marella (widow of Eulalio Villavicencio) and her children, filed a claim against the estate of the deceased Felisa Arriola for the sum of P10,032.42. They alleged that this amount was the unpaid balance of various sums that Felisa Arriola had received from them during her lifetime for the exploitation of her haciendas, based on a business relationship that originated with Felisa’s father. The claim was denied by the committee on appraisal in the estate settlement proceedings. The defendant, Agripino Agoncillo, as judicial administrator of his deceased wife’s estate, denied the claim, arguing that the debt was null and void, that it was actually the plaintiffs who were indebted to the estate, and that the plaintiffs’ action had prescribed. The Court of First Instance of Batangas, while finding that the debt existed and was unpaid, absolved the defendant on the ground of prescription. The plaintiffs appealed.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the plaintiffs’ action to recover the debt from the estate of Felisa Arriola had prescribed.
RULING:
No, the action had not prescribed. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the lower court.
The cause of action accrued on July 24, 1899, the date of the last liquidation showing the final balance against Felisa Arriola. Since this was prior to October 1, 1901 (when the Code of Civil Procedure took effect), the prescriptive period under the Civil Code governs, not the Code of Civil Procedure. Under Article 1964 of the Civil Code, personal actions prescribe in fifteen years. The complaint was filed on July 18, 1913, well within the fifteen-year period. Furthermore, even assuming the cause of action accrued earlier, prescription was interrupted by the extrajudicial demands made by Gliceria Marella upon Felisa Arriola in 1906, 1907, and 1910, as provided under Article 1973 of the Civil Code. Consequently, the defendant, as judicial administrator, was ordered to pay the plaintiffs the claimed amount of P10,032.42 with legal interest from the filing of the complaint.