GR L 2243; (February, 1906) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-2243
FACTS:
Plaintiff Mateo Aldeguer and defendants Gregorio Aposaga and Servanda Bagaygay were residents of Sara, Iloilo. The defendants owed Alejandro Noarbe a debt of about 1,600 pesos, which was the subject of a judgment. On January 22, 1903, the defendants gave Aldeguer 800 pesos to pay Noarbe on account of this debt. Instead of delivering the money, Aldeguer purchased Noarbe’s credit against the defendants for 850 pesos on or about February 9, 1903. Aldeguer then filed an action to recover from the defendants the difference between the total debt (1,610.72 pesos) and the 800 pesos previously delivered, amounting to 810.72 pesos. The defendants denied the claim and asserted a counterclaim, alleging they had paid Aldeguer an additional 850 pesos on April 13, 1903, to fully settle the account, with any excess intended to cover Aldeguer’s travel expenses. The trial court found the defendants’ testimony on the second payment more credible and rendered judgment in their favor, dismissing both the main action and the counterclaim, and awarding costs to the defendants.
ISSUE:
Whether the trial court erred in finding that the defendants had made the second payment of 850 pesos to the plaintiff, thereby extinguishing the debt.
RULING:
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision. The Court emphasized that the credibility of witnesses and the assessment of evidence are primarily within the province of the trial judge who observed the witnesses firsthand. Given the directly conflicting testimonies presented by both parties regarding the alleged second payment, the Supreme Court found no compelling reason to overturn the trial court’s factual finding that the defendants had indeed paid the additional 850 pesos. Consequently, the debt was fully settled, and the plaintiff had no right to recover the claimed balance. The Court also noted that the defendants’ counterclaim, based on Article 1535 of the Civil Code (governing redemption of a litigated credit), was not properly exercised and thus correctly dismissed. The judgment of the lower court was affirmed with costs against the appellant.