G.R. No. L-11943, December 21, 1918
MARIA FERRER, in her own behalf and as administratrix of the intestate estate of Mariano Trias, plaintiff-appellant, vs. MARIA IGNACIO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.

FACTS:
Mariano Trias and Maria Ferrer obtained judgments against Buenaventura and Perfecto Dimaguila. To satisfy these, certain parcels of land were attached and sold at public auction. In a separate case, other lands of the Dimaguila brothers were sold, and Mariano Trias acquired their right of repurchase, later redeeming and selling these lands. Maria Ignacio, mother of the Dimaguila brothers, claiming ownership of the lands sold, sued to recover them. This litigation was settled by a compromise agreement (Exhibit A) wherein Maria Ignacio and her sons bound themselves to pay Trias and Ferrer a balance of P5,050 within one and a half years. In turn, Trias and Ferrer recognized Maria Ignacio’s title and promised to cooperate “with all the means within his power” to effect the redemption of the lands from the various purchasers. A partial payment of P500 was made. The lands were not redeemed, as some were sold absolutely and the redemption period for others had lapsed. Maria Ferrer (Trias having died) sued to recover the unpaid balance. The defendants filed a cross-complaint for damages, alleging Ferrer failed to fulfill her obligation to redeem the lands. The trial court largely absolved Maria Ignacio and the surety, ordered the Dimaguila brothers to pay a reduced amount, and ordered Ferrer to pay Maria Ignacio the value of the lands as damages. Ferrer appealed.

ISSUE:
Whether the spouses Mariano Trias and Maria Ferrer violated their obligation under the compromise agreement by failing to actually redeem the lands in question.

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision. The obligation of Trias and Ferrer under the compromise was merely to cooperate with the defendants in effecting the redemption, not to guarantee its actual accomplishment. The contract clearly stipulated that the defendants (Maria Ignacio and her sons) promised to accomplish the redemption, with Trias cooperating “with all the means within his power.” This cooperation was substantially complied with, as evidenced by Trias’s personal negotiations with some purchasers and sending his lawyer to others. The defendants, as the parties primarily obligated to redeem, were presumed to know the conditions affecting redemption (i.e., lapsed periods and absolute sales) when they entered the agreement. The compromise itself, involving mutual concessions (Ferrer granting a period for payment, recognizing Maria Ignacio’s title, and offering cooperation), provided sufficient consideration for the defendants’ promise to pay the balance. Therefore, the defendants (Maria Ignacio, Buenaventura Dimaguila, Perfecto Dimaguila, and the surety Pedro Guevara) were held jointly and solidarily liable to pay the remaining balance of P4,550 with legal interest. Ferrer was absolved from the cross-complaint.