GR No.

L-47362 December 19, 1940

VILLARROEL JUAN F., relapsing-appellant,

vs.
ESTRADA BERNARDINO, I resorted-appealed.

D. Felipe Agoncillo in representation of the appellant-appellant.

Mr Crispin Oben in representation of the appellee.

AVANCEÑA, Pres. :

On May 9, 1912, Alejandro F. Callao, the mother of the defendant Juan F. Villarroel, obtained from
the spouses Mariano Estrada and Severina a loan of P1,000 payable after seven years (Exhibit
A). Alejandra died, leaving as sole heir to the defendant. The spouses Mariano Estrada and
Severina also died, leaving as sole heir the plaintiff Bernardino Estrada. On August 9, 1930, the
defendant signed a document (Exhibit B) by which it declares the applicant to owe the amount of
P1,000, with an interest of 12 percent per year. This action deals with the collection of this amount.

The Court of First Instance of Laguna, in which this action was filed, ordered the defendant to pay
the claimant the claimed amount of P1,000 with his legal interests of 12 percent a year from August
9, 1930 until its full payment. This sentence is appealed.

It will be noted that the parties to the present case are, respectively, the sole heirs of the original
creditors and debtor. This action is exercised by virtue of the obligation that the defendant as the
only child of the original debtor contracted in favor of the plaintiff, sole heir of the primitive
creditors. It is admitted that the amount of P1,000 to which this obligation is incurred is the same
debt of the defendant's mother to the plaintiff's parents. Lawphil.net

Although the action to recover the original debt has already been prescribed when the claim was
filed in this case, the question that arises in this appeal is mainly whether, notwithstanding such a
requirement, the action filed. However, the present action is not based on the original obligation
contracted by the defendant's mother, who has already been prescribed, but in which the defendant
contracted on August 9, 1930 (Exhibit B) upon assuming the fulfillment of that obligation, Already
prescribed. Since the defendant is the sole inheritor of the primitive debtor, with the right to succeed
in his inheritance, that debt, brought by his mother legally, although it has lost its effectiveness by
prescription, is now, however, for a moral obligation, which is consideration Sufficient to create and
render effective and enforceable its obligation voluntarily contracted on August 9, 1930 in Exhibit B.

The rule that a new promise to pay a pre-paid debt must be made by the same obligated person or
by another legally authorized by it, is not applicable to the present case in which it is not required to
fulfill the obligation of the obligee orignally, but Of which he voluntarily wanted to assume this
obligation.

The judgment appealed against is upheld, with costs being paid to the appellant. That is how it is
commanded.

Imperial, Diaz, Laurel, and Horrilleno, MM., Are satisfied.