ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 123666.January 29, 2001]
SPS. ENRIQUEZ vs. BUENAVENTURA
SECOND DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 29 2001.
G.R. No. 123666 (Spouses Leonila G. Enriquez and Luis Enriquez vs. Elena Buenaventura.)
On 22 March 1996 spouses Leonila and Luis Enriquez filed a petition for review on certiorari assailing the Decision of the Court of Appeals dated 30 May 1995 which affirmed the Resolution of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City in a collection suit filed by respondent Elena Buenaventura against petitioner spouses.
The trial Court granted
respondent's motion for summary judgment and ordered petitioners to pay her P180,000.00,
the total amount of their indebtedness with interests plus P10,000.00
for attorney's fees.
In assailing the Court of Appeals'
Decision petitioner spouses allege that the appellate court erred in affirming
the summary judgment issued by the trial court when the issue of whether their
obligation was already due and demandable at the time the collection suit was
filed had not yet been resolved. In other words, petitioners do not deny that
they owe respondent P180,000.00 but only that the same was not yet due,
and demandable when the complaint was filed.
In her Comment filed 16 February 2000
respondent alleged that the petition should be denied for lack of merit
considering that petitioner spouses had already fully paid their P180,000.00
indebtedness to her. However, respondent complained that the interests thereon
and the P10,000.00 decreed by both the trial court and the Court of
Appeals for attorney's fees had not yet been paid.
In their Reply to the foregoing comment, petitioners claimed that they had already issued, per agreement with respondent, several postdated checks for P50,000.00 to cover the interests and attorney's fees. 1 Rollo, p. 101.
On 6 July 2000 respondent
filed an Ex-parte Motion to Dismiss by
Reason of Petitioners' Full Compliance with Appealed Judgment stating that
petitioners had already fully paid the
P180,000.00
indebtedness to respondent as well as the interests thereon and attorney's fees and praying that this case be dismissed
on account of such payment. When asked to comment thereon petitioners, through
counsel, stated in their Comment that
they had no objection to the motion to dismiss the case filed by private
respondent.
2
Id
., p. 108.
WHEREFORE, on motion of respondent for the reason that petitioners had already fully paid their obligation, without objection from petitioners, the motion is GRANTED and the petition is DISMISSED. This case is considered CLOSED and TERMINATED.
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) TOMASITA M. DRIS
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH