MIGUEL MACTAL, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. FILOMENO MELEGRITO, DEFENDANT AND APPELLEE.

This is an action to recover the sum of P1,777.00, plus P1,000.00 as
moral damages and P500.00 as attorney’s fees. Defendant, Filomeno
Melegrito, filed an answer admitting some allegations of the complaint
and denying other allegations thereof, and setting up some special
defenses and a counterclaim. In due course, the Court of First Instance
of Nueva Ecija rendered a decision dismissing the case with costs
against plaintiff, Miguel Mactal, upon the ground that the
consideration of the promissory note upon which the complaint is based
was the dismissal of a criminal case for estafa against the defendant and, hence, illicit, immoral and contrary to public policy, as well as void ab initio.
The case is before us on appeal taken by the plaintiff, who maintains
that the lower court erred in holding that this action is based, upon
the aforementioned promissory note, and that the consideration thereof
was the dismissal of the estafa case against the appellee.

It appears, and the lower court held, that, on or about February 5,
1953, Mactal delivered P1,770.00 to Melegrito, to be used by him in the
purchase of palay for Mactal, with a ten (10%) per cent commission in
his (Melegrito’s) favor, or returned to Mactal, within ten (10) days,
should he (Melegrito) fail to buy palay. This obligation was set forth
in a receipt signed by Melegrito, who neither bought palay nor returned
said amount. Hence, Mactal accused him or estafa in the Justice
of the Peace Court of Guimba, Nueva Ecija. When the case was about to
be heard, on October 19, 1953, Florencio Paraso, then chief of police
of Guimba, acting upon Melegrito’s request, prevailed upon Mactal to
move for the dismissal of the case and be contented with a promise on
the part of Melegrito to pay, not later than January, 1954, said
P1,777.00, plus the sum of P7,000, balance of his account with Mactal
in connection with another transaction. Accordingly, Melegrito signed a
document Exhibit A (also Exhibit 1), prepared by Paraso in the Tagalog
dialect, which translated into English, reads:

“I,
Filomeno Melegrito, married, of age, at present residing at barrio
Cabaruan, Guimba, Nueva Ecija, this 15th day of October 1953, hereby
certify to the following:

“That I am indebted to Mr. Miguel
Mactal in the sum of P1,777.00 Philippine Currency, which I promise to
pay him within the month of January, 1954,

“In witness whereof, I have hereunto affixed my name and surname in the
presence of two (2) witnesses, this 19th day of October, 1953, in
Guimba, Nueva Ecija.

(Sgd.) Filomeno Melegrito”

Forthwith,
the receipt above mentioned was destroyed and the criminal case was, on
the same day, dismissed on motion of Mactal. Despite, however, repeated
demands by the latter, Melegrito subsequently failed to pay the
aforementioned sum of P1,777.00. Hence, this action, which was begun on
January 26, 1955.

The lower court specifically found that
Melegrito had on February 5, 1953, received from Mactal P1,777.00 to be
used in the purchase of palay for the latter, with the obligation to
return, said amount, within ten (10) days, if not spent for said
purpose. In fact, Melegrito admitted, on the witness stand, that he is
indebted to the plaintiff in the aggregate sum of P1,777.00, although
he claims that his liability therefor was merely that of a guarantor,
not principal debtor. So when the chief of police succeeded in
persuading Mactal to withdraw the criminal case for estafa,
Melegrito was only too willing to sign Exhibit A, in which he promised
to pay the aforementioned amount in January, 1954. The consideration
for this promise was, therefore, the aforesaid pre-existing debt of
Melegrito, not the dismissal of the estafa case, which merely furnished the occasion for the execution of Exhibit A (see Garrido vs. Cardenas, L-10631 [promulgated April 25, 1958]; Hibberd vs. Rhode and McMillan, 32 Phil., 476; Goodrum vs. Merchants & Planters Bank, 102 Ark. 326).

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is hereby reversed and. another
one shall be entered sentencing defendant Filomeno Melegrito to pay the
plaintiff Miguel Mactal the sum of P1,777.00, with interest thereon at
the legal rate, from January 26, 1955, as well as the costs of the
proceedings. It is so ordered.

Bengzon, Acting C. J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera, Paredes, and Dizon, JJ., concur.