ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 126649. February 17, 1999]

ENRICO SANTOS, et al. vs. COURT OF APPEALS et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 17, 1999.

G.R. No. 126649 (Enrico Santos and Florentina Santos v. Court of Appeals and China Banking Corporation.)

On 25 October 1996 petitioners filed an Urgent Motion for Extension of thirty (30) days from 28 October 1996, or until 27 November 1996, to file their petition for review on certiorari. Subsequently on 28 November 1996 petitioners filed a Manifestation and Motion Ex Abundanti Cautela stating that they and respondent China Banking Corporation (CBC) had reached an agreement in principle to end their controversy that had given rise to this litigation as well as all their claims and counterclaims against each other. Hence, they manifested that they were no longer interested in pursuing the instant petition, but at the same time prayed that the period to file petition be "suspended" for twenty (20) days or until 18 December 1996 "against the remote possibility that the 'done deal' (might) get unstuck."

On 18 December 1997, petitioners filed another Manifestation stating for the record that they respondent CBC reached an agreement on all points, thus mooting their plan to elevate their dispute to this Court. In its resolution of 27 January 1997 the Court required respondent CBC to confirm within ten (10) days from notice whether such an accord had been reached by the parties.

In compliance, respondent CBC confirmed that a settlement had been arrived at and attached a photocopy of the Compromise Agreement dated 11 December 1996 signed by the parties and their respective counsel. Thus -

COMPROMISE AGREEMENT

The parties, assisted by their respective counsel, respectfully submit the following compromise agreement.

WHEREAS, the parties have filed claims and counterclaims against each other; and

WHEREAS, the parties have reached an amicable settlement to put an end to the controversy that gave rise to this suit;

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the terms and conditions of this settlement appearing hereunder, plaintiffs and defendants hereby agrees as follows:

1. Defendant bank agrees to extend to plaintiffs a loan in the amount of TWENTY MILLION PESOS (P20,000,000.00), with interest computed at 19% per annum, which shall be secured by the real estate mortgage covering the property located at No. 49 Provincial Road, Bagbaguin, Sta. Maria, Bulacan free from all liens and encumbrances, except that in favor of defendant bank. The outstanding account still owing by plaintiffs to defendant bank in the amount of TWO MILLION PESOS (P2,000,000.00) shall be deducted from said loan.

2. The parties, as well as their respective assigns and heirs, shall have no further claims or counterclaims against each other, nor any cause of action arising from or in connection with the subject matter of this case, expecting that or those which may result a failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this agreement, in which case the aggrieved party shall be entitled to a writ of execution without further hearing; and

3. The parties hereby waive all their claims and counterclaims against each other or one another arising out of the cause or causes of action subject of this case, save their faithful implementation of this agreement.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully pray that this Honorable Court approve the foregoing compromise agreement, and that judgment be rendered in accordance therewith, enjoining the parties to comply strictly with their undertaking thereunder, without pronouncement as to costs.

Makati City, December 11, 1996.

Finding no stipulation in the Compromise Agreement that is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order and public policy, and conformably with this Court's policy of encouraging litigants to settle their differences amicably among themselves, the Court Resolves to APPROVE the Compromise Agreement and to ADOPT the same as the decision in this case. The parties are enjoined to comply strictly with their undertaking thereunder.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA B. MAGAY-DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE