Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1951 > November 1951 Decisions > G.R. No. L-4249 November 20, 1951 - SOFIA GUSTILO, ET AL. v. CONCHITA JAGUNAP, ET AL.

090 Phil 389:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-4249. November 20, 1951.]

SOFIA GUSTILO, GLORIA GUSTILO, ROMEO GUSTILO, FELISA GUSTILO, and JULIETA GUSTILO, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CONCHITA JAGUNAP and her husband SEVERINO QUIDATO, Defendants-Appellees.

Federico J. Jarantilla,, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Felipe Ysmael, for Defendants-Appellees.

SYLLABUS


1. OBLIGATIONS; VALIDITY OF PAYMENT MADE IN JAPANESE WAR NOTES UPHELD; CREDITORS CANNOT INVOKE DURESS, COERCION, ETC. — Payments of pre-war debts in Japanese war notes have been uniformly held valid and effective to discharge an obligation if the contract did not specify the currency in which the debt was to be satisfied and was silent as to the date of maturity. On the authority of these decisions it was immaterial whether duress of coercion, general or specific, was exerted on the creditors.


D E C I S I O N


TUASON, J.:


On July 31, 1936, Conchita Jagunap, married to Severino Quidato, mortgaged two parcels of land to Primitivo Gustilo and Sofia Gustilo, husband and wife, to secure a debt of P1,500. The mortgage was for a term of five years with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per year. Sometime in 1944, the mortgage having matured, the mortgagors tendered payment of the debt but the creditors turned it down because it was in Japanese military notes. As a result of this refusal, the mortgagors consigned in court the amount due, in the same notes, pursuant to Art. 1176 of the Civil Code then in force. On May 1, the mortgagees relented, and through their attorney-in-fact withdrew from the clerk of court the amount consigned in full satisfaction of the obligation, and on May 3 executed a document of cancellation of the mortgage. This document was duly entered on the same date in the records of the Register of Deeds and inscribed on the corresponding certificate of title.

Primitivo Gustilo having died on November 20, 1946, his widow and children commenced the present action against the mortgagors to collect the same mortgage debt plus interest and attorney’s fees. The grounds alleged for the action were: "That during the period of Japanese occupation, the Japanese Military Police or ’Kempetai’ compelled the inhabitants of Iloilo Province to accept the Japanese Military notes under penalty of death for refusal to accept the same; that the plaintiff Sofia Gustilo and Primitivo Gustilo acting under threat and intimidation had no other alternative at that time, but much against their will, to receive from the clerk of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo Province the amount of P1,500 in Japanese Military notes deposited by the herein defendants in order to avoid the imminent penalty of death on refusal to accept the depository amount."cralaw virtua1aw library

When the payment was tendered and consigned by the debtors and accepted by the creditors, the same was due and demandable, and the only currency then in circulation was the Japanese fiat money. Not to pay their debts at that time in the only money then in circulation, the plaintiffs would subject themselves to a lawsuit and possible loss of their property. Certainly, they would have to continue paying a high rate of interest.

Payments of pre-war debts in Japanese war notes have been uniformly held valid and effective to discharge the obligations if the contract did not specify the currency with which the debt was to be satisfied and was silent as to the date of maturity. On the authority of these decisions it was immaterial whether duress or coercion, general or specific, was exerted on the creditors.

Viewed from the equity side of the case, the plaintiff’s action is also untenable. The money they received had value and could have been employed in useful purchases or profitable investments. Very probably it was. They then are estopped from repudiating their action after they have accepted and presumably made use of the money.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed with costs against the appellants.

Paras, C.J., Feria, Bengzon, Reyes, Jugo and Bautista Angelo, JJ., concur.

Pablo, J., concurs in the dispositive part.

Padilla, J., concurs in the result.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






November-1951 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-3609 November 8, 1951 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN DE LA ROSA, ET AL.

    090 Phil 365

  • G.R. No. L-5150 November 8, 1951 - JOSE PRO. TEVES, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

    090 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. L-3835 November 15, 1951 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO JAULA

    090 Phil 379

  • Adm. Case No. 74 November 20, 1951 - In re: ATTY. ARTURO SAMANIEGO

    090 Phil 382

  • G.R. No. L-3738 November 20, 1951 - CONCEPCION ABELLA v. MUNICIPALITY OF NAGA, ET AL.

    090 Phil 385

  • G.R. No. L-3920 November 20, 1951 - LUISA LIM v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    090 Phil 387

  • G.R. No. L-4249 November 20, 1951 - SOFIA GUSTILO, ET AL. v. CONCHITA JAGUNAP, ET AL.

    090 Phil 389

  • G.R. No. L-4615 November 20, 1951 - JUAN DULDULAO, ET AL. v. EUSEBIO F. RAMOS, ET AL.

    090 Phil 392

  • G.R. No. L-2966 November 21, 1951 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BASILIO OROBIA

    090 Phil 396

  • G.R. No. L-3691 November 21, 1951 - JACINTO M. DEL SAZ OROZCO v. SALVADOR ARANETA, ET AL.

    090 Phil 399

  • G.R. No. L-4374 November 23, 1951 - RAMON CHUA YU SUN v. CEFERINO DE LOS SANTOS

    090 Phil 402

  • G.R. No. L-3740 November 26, 1951 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DONATO TORTUGA

    090 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. L-3889 November 26, 1951 - VICENTE BAUTISTA v. LAM PING, ET AL.

    090 Phil 409

  • G.R. No. L-3470 November 27, 1951 - FRANCISCO CHAN SU HOK v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    090 Phil 415

  • G.R. No. L-3975 November 27, 1951 - FRANCISCO DALUPAN v. FRED M. HARDEN

    090 Phil 417

  • G.R. No. L-4934 November 28, 1951 - PEOPLE OF PHIL. v. JUAN P. ENRIQUEZ

    090 Phil 423

  • G.R. No. L-2934 November 29, 1951 - SY KIONG v. MARCELINO SARMIENTO

    090 Phil 434

  • G.R. No. L-2978 November 29, 1951 - PACIFIC COMMERCIAL COMPANY v. GO TIAN GEE & COMPANY, ET AL.

    090 Phil 439

  • G.R. Nos. L-3272-73 November 29, 1951 - MANUEL GONZALES v. MANOLITA GONZALES DE CARUNGCONG

    090 Phil 444

  • G.R. No. L-3648 November 29, 1951 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. IDRIS AMILHUSIN

    090 Phil 455

  • G.R. No. L-3677 November 29, 1951 - MERCEDES LEON v. MANUFACTURERS LIFE INSURANCE CO.

    090 Phil 459

  • G.R. No. L-3764 November 29, 1951 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HUGO PEREGIL, ET AL.

    090 Phil 465

  • G.R. No. L-3884 November 29, 1951 - INTERNATIONAL COLLEGES, INC. v. NIEVES ARGONZA, ET AL.

    090 Phil 470

  • G.R. No. L-4010 November 29, 1951 - NIEVES P. ATIENZA v. PHILIPPINE CHARITY SWEEPSTAKES OFFICE

    090 Phil 478

  • G.R. No. L-4037 November 29, 1951 - TRINIDAD FLORENDO v. RUFINA ORGANO

    090 Phil 483

  • G.R. No. L-4067 November 29, 1951 - ROSARIO GARCIA v. JULIANA LACUESTA, ET AL.

    090 Phil 489

  • G.R. No. L-4094 November 29, 1951 - VICTOR CASTRO, ET AL. v. JUAN ORPIANO, ET AL.

    090 Phil 491

  • G.R. No. L-4135 November 29, 1951 - SEVERINA ROSALES, ET AL. v. LEOCADIO S. TANSECO, ET AL.

    090 Phil 496

  • G.R. No. L-4199 November 29, 1951 - THE BORDEN COMPANY v. DOCTORS PHARMACEUTICALS INC., ET AL.

    090 Phil 500

  • G.R. No. L-4422 November 29, 1951 - ROGELIA PAULETE v. VENANCIO LAPLANA

    090 Phil 503

  • G.R. No. L-4443 November 29, 1951 - CORAZON ROQUE v. BONIFACIO YSIP, ET AL.

    090 Phil 505