BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. RONALD C. ROSALES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
LAMPAS PERALTA, J.:
the present case was referred to the Philippine Mediation Center-Court
of Appeals for mediation. In a Mediator’s Report dated May 2, 2014,[3]
the Appellate Court Mediator reported a “SUCCESSFUL SETTLEMENT” between
the parties. Attached to the Mediator’s Report is the parties’
Compromise Agreement dated May 2, 2014,[4] pertinent portions of which read:
COME NOW THE PARTIES, assisted by the
undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Court, respectfully submit;
They have reached a payment arrangement for the satisfaction of the
decision of the Honorable Court as follows:1. That the defendant admits that he is indebted to the plaintiff in the amount of Php1,086,591.57.
2. The defendant shall pay the above-mentioned amount via over-the counter at any branch of BDO UNIBANK Inc., under the Promissory Note Number 822508162239 without the need for demand and notice by paying the following amounts:
JUNE 30, 2014 JULY 30, 2014 AUG 30, 2014 SEPT 30, 1899 OCT 30, 2014 NOV 30, 2014 DEC 30, 2014 JAN 30, 2014 FEB 28, 2015 MARCH 30, 2015 APRIL 30, 2015 MAY 30, 2015 JUNE 30, 2015 JULY 30, 2015 AUG 30, 2015 SEPT 30, 2015 OCT 30, 2015 NOV 30, 2015 DEC 30, 2015 JAN 30, 2016 FEB 28, 2016 MARCH 30, 2016 APRIL 30, 2016 MAY 30, 2016 JUNE 30, 2016 JULY 30, 2016 AUG 30, 2016 SEPT 30, 2016 OCT 30, 2016 NOV 30, 2016
DEC 30, 2016 JAN 30, 2017 FEB 28, 2017 MARCH 30, 2017 APRIL 30, 2017 MAY 30, 2017 JUNE 30, 2017 JULY 30, 2017 AUG 30, 2017 SEPT 30, 1899 OCT 30, 2017 NOV 30, 2017 DEC 30, 2017 JAN 30, 2018 FEB 28, 2018 MARCH 30, 2018 APRIL 30, 2018 MAY 30, 2018 JUNE 30, 2018 JULY 30, 2018 AUG 30, 2018 SEPT 30, 2018 OCT 30, 2018 NOV 30, 2018 DEC 30, 2018 JAN 30, 2019 FEB 28, 2019 MARCH 30, 2019 APRIL 30, 2019 MAY 30, 2019
3. That except as to the amount and manner of
payment above-stated, the contracts executed by the defendant, bases of
complaint, and shall continue to remain in force for as long as the
above-stated obligation of the defendant has not been paid in full;4. That in case of default, in the payment of the above-mentioned
amount when due, the Plaintiff shall be entitled to an immediate
execution for the payment of the entire obligation with interest thereon
6% legal interest per annum and 6% late penalty fee per annum.5. That there shall be no further costs unless execution is
resorted to, in which case, plaintiff shall be entitled to recover the
expenses thereby.6. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary stated herein,
Plaintiff’s acceptance of incomplete and delayed payments shall not be
considered as extending the term of the obligation nor as a
modification, alteration and novation of the conditions contained
herein.
It appearing that the terms of the foregoing Compromise Agreement
are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public
policy, the Court approves the same and the parties are enjoined to
abide by the same in good faith.
WHEREFORE,
judgment is hereby rendered approving and adopting the terms of the
subject Compromise Agreement dated May 2, 2014 and enjoining the parties
to abide by the same in good faith.
Accordingly, this case is
considered closed and terminated. Let entry of judgment be issued
pursuant to Section 1(b), Rule VII, 2009 Internal Rules of the Court of
Appeals.
SO ORDERED.
Sorongon[1] and Manahan[2], JJ., concur.
[1] Vice Justice Myra V. Garcia-Fernandez , per Office Order No. 240-14-ABR dated May 23, 2014.
[2] Vice Justice Francisco P. Acosta , per Office Order No. 241-14-ABR dated May 23, 2014.
[3] p. 48, Rollo
[4] pp. 49-51, ibid.