Papa v Valencia

G.R. No. 105188 January 23, 1998
Art. 1249 – Payment of debts in money shall be made in currency.

Facts:

·          The respondents filed with the RTC Pasig a complaint for specific performance against petitioner to deliver the title and turn over the accrued rentals.

·          The petitioner, acting as attorney-in-fact of Angela M. Butte, sold to Peñarroyo through Valencia, a parcel of land, which was mortgaged to the Associated Banking Corporation, together with several other parcels of land.

·          The bank refused to release it unless and until all the mortgaged properties were also redeemed.

·          Respondents discovered that petitioner had been collecting monthly rentals from the tenants of the property, knowing that said property had already been sold to Peñarroyo.

·          On appeal, the petitioner argued that alleged sale of the subject property had not been consummated because he did not encashed the check (in the amount of P40,000.00), which did not produce the effect of payment as in Art. 1249 of the Civil Code.

Issue:

WoN the delivery of a check produces the effect of payment only when it is cashed.

Held:

            No, the Court holds that while it is true that the delivery of a check produces the effect of payment only when it is cashed, pursuant to Art. 1249 of the Civil Code, the rule is otherwise if the debtor is prejudiced by the creditor's unreasonable delay in presentment.

            Art. 1249 of the Civil Code provides, in part, that payment by checks shall produce the effect of payment only when they have been cashed or when through the fault of the creditor they have been impaired.

            In the instant case, the acceptance of a check implies an undertaking of due diligence in presenting it for payment, and if he from whom it is received sustains loss by want of such diligence, it will be held to operate as actual payment of the debt or obligation for which it was given. It has, likewise, been held that if no presentment is made at all, the drawer cannot be held liable irrespective of loss or injury¹² unless presentment is otherwise excused. Granting that petitioner had never encashed the check, his failure to do so for more than ten (10) years undoubtedly resulted in the impairment of the check through his unreasonable and unexplained delay.

            Thus, the petition for review is DENIED.