EULALIO BELISARIO, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. PAZ NATIVIDAD VIUDA DE ZULUETA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLEE.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the
Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija in an action for the recovery of
two tracts of land situated in the barrio of San Francisco,
municipality of Lupao, in said province, and described in certificates
of transfer Nos. 3357 and 3358 issued by the register of deeds of the
Province of Pangasinan (in which the lands were formerly situated) in
favor of the defendant.

It appears from Exhibit A that the plaintiff sold the said lands
absolutely and without reservation to the defendant for the
consideration of P37,000, which was duly paid, and the agreement on the
part of the grantee to assume an indebtedness secured by a lien for
P4,500, which was likewise duly paid. The deed recites that the sale is
absolute and in perpetuity and the grantor warrants to defend the
title. The deed bears the date of April 29, 1927.

On the same date the defendant executed and delivered in favor of
the plaintiff Exhibit B which, after reciting that the defendant is the
absolute owner of the lands referred to, granted the plaintiff an
option to repurchase the lands on or before the end of May, 1931, for
the sum of P37,000.

These two instruments are very clear in their terms, were duly
signed by both parties in the presence of two witnesses and
acknowledged before a notary public and recorded. We see no reason
whatever for varying the terms thereof.

On the 28th of May, 1931, the plaintiff appeared at the house of
the defendant and offered to exercise his option of repurchase under
said Exhibit B by tendering to the defendant a check in the sum of
P37,000, drawn by Rosendo Santiago against his account in the Peoples
Bank and Trust Company. The books of the bank disclosed that at the
time said check was tendered to the defendant the drawer thereof had on
deposit in the said bank subject to check the sum of P5.85. Even if the
check had been good, the defendant was not legally bound to accept it
because such a check does not satisfy the requirements of a legal
tender.

Finding no merit in this appeal, the judgment of the court below is affirmed with costs against the appellant.

Abad Santos, Imperial, Goddard, and Diaz, JJ., concur.