Philippine

Airlines, Inc. v. CA
181 SCRA | GR No. 49188 | 30 January 1990 | Guttierez, Jr., J.

Payment in Negotiable
Instruments

Princess Trisha Joy Z. Uy | Law 122-Obligations and Contracts | Grp3

PAL paid its judgment debt through a check in the name of the
executing officer. The officer absconded and PAL was ordered to pay
the creditor, Amelia Tan.

Facts:
!
!
!

!
!

A judgment was rendered by the CFI ordering PAL to pay Amelia Tan a certain amount. Upon
appeal, CA affirmed the CFIs decision and assigned Deputy Sheriff Reyes for its enforcement.
Four months later, Tan moved for the issuance of an alias writ, claiming that the judgment
remained unsatisfied.
PAL opposed this motion claiming that it has paid its dues through Sheriff Reyes, which was
evidenced by cash vouchers and receipts signed by the officer. It turns out that PAL paid through
issuing checks in the name of the Sheriff.
CA denied the writ but ordered the Sheriff to appear and explain why he has not remitted the
amounts to Amelia Tan. Sheriff Reyes absconded or disappeared.
Tan filed a Substitute Motion for Alias Writ of Execution, which was again opposed by the PAL for
the same reasons, but which the lower court granted. Hence, this petition.

Issue/Ratio:
WON an alias writ of execution can be issued without a prior return of the original writ of the
implementing officer (Reyes). YES

It is a fact that it is unsure whether the implementing officer would return. If he does not return, and PAL
was not compelled to pay Amelia Tan, the mischief of the officer would impede the rights of the
creditor.
So long as the judgment is not satisfied, a plaintiff is entitled to other writs of execution.

WON the payment made to the Sheriff satisfied the judgment. NO

Art. 1240: A payment, in order to be effective to discharge an obligation, must be made to the proper
person. A person with authority to receive such. Usually, a Sheriff in charge of the enforcement of a
judgment has that authority, however, in this case the payment was not in cash but in checks not
payable to the plaintiff but to the sheriff. Such payment did not extinguish the debt.
Unless authorized, the officer has no authority to accept anything but money as payment.
Art. 1249: A negotiable instrument, in this case a check, is only a substitute for money, the delivery of such
does not operate as payment.
By drawing the checks in the name of the Sheriff, the petitioner created a situation where the Sheriff can
encash the check and use it for personal gain.


-----oOo-----

If PAL paid in cash, would that have been considered payment?

Court says: Payment in money or cash to the implementing officer may be deemed absolute payment of
the judgment debt but the Court has never suggested that debtors settle their obligations by turning
over huge amounts of cash to sheriffs.

Payment the discharge of a debt or obligation in money.
Execution the process which carries into effect a decree or judgment. It is for the Sheriff to accomplish.
Satisfaction of a judgment the payment of the amount of the writ. It is for the creditor to achieve.

Petition dismissed. CA Decision affirmed. Court Administrator ordered to follow up on actions taken
against Sheriff Reyes.