GR L 3838; (December, 1950) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-3838 December 27, 1950
RITO V. CRUZ and TEODORA CORONEL-CRUZ, petitioners, vs. FRANCISCO E. JOSE, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, SEVERO ABELLERA, Sheriff of Rizal, and DONATO DEL ROSARIO, respondents.
FACTS
Respondent Donato Del Rosario filed an action against petitioners Rito V. Cruz and Teodora Coronel-Cruz for recovery of a sum of money. The parties entered into an amicable settlement, which the court approved and rendered into judgment. The settlement required petitioners to pay in monthly installments. It stipulated that if petitioners failed to pay any installment when due, the entire unpaid balance would become immediately due and demandable, and execution would issue against their property, including a motorboat named “DIONISIO” offered as security. Petitioners defaulted on the installment due April 30, 1950. Consequently, on May 5, 1950, Del Rosario filed a motion for execution. Petitioners were notified but did not appear at the hearing on May 10. The court granted the writ of execution. Petitioners then filed this petition for prohibition to prevent the execution, claiming their failure to pay on April 30 was excusable because it was a Sunday and the next day was a holiday.
ISSUE
Whether the respondent court properly issued the writ of execution for the judgment based on the amicable settlement after petitioners defaulted on an installment payment.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court held the writ of execution was properly issued. The court found petitioners’ excuse for non-payment (that April 30 was a Sunday and May 1 a holiday) untenable, as payment could be made on such days. The petitioners’ conduct—failing to appear at the hearing on the motion for execution and only offering to pay by consignation the day after the hearing—indicated the default was due to lack of funds, not the cited holidays. This was corroborated by respondent’s claim that petitioners had asked for an extension, which was denied. The terms of the judgment, based on the parties’ agreement, expressly allowed immediate execution upon default. The petition for prohibition was denied.
AI Generated by Armztrong.