G.R. No. L-3592; February 27, 1950
Testate estate of Alexander I. Bachrach. ANNE B. BACHRACH, executrix, petitioner, vs. RAFAEL AMPARO and Intestate estate of VALENTIN DESCALS by its Administrator IGNACIO PLANAS, respondents.

FACTS

In the testate estate proceedings of Alexander I. Bachrach, his executrix, Anne B. Bachrach, initially recommended the payment of a promissory note executed by the deceased in favor of Valentin Descals. Based on this recommendation, the court issued an order on July 1, 1946, directing payment. This order became final and executory. Years later, after Descals died and his administrator sought enforcement, the executrix objected, invoking the moratorium law and arguing the obligation was payable only after a treaty of peace with Japan was signed. The respondent judge denied her objections and ordered payment. The executrix then filed a motion to suspend payment based on the moratorium, which was also denied. She filed this petition to annul that denial.

ISSUE

May the executrix invoke the moratorium law to suspend payment of a promissory note after she had previously recommended its payment and a court order for payment based on that recommendation had become final and executory?

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition. The Court held that by initially recommending payment of the note, the executrix waived the benefit of the moratorium law. This waiver, upon which the final and executory order of payment was based, could not be withdrawn at will. Any relief on grounds such as mistake should have been sought through the proper remedy (like Rule 38) and appealed in a timely manner, which she failed to do. The order of the respondent judge directing payment was upheld.

AI Generated by Armztrong.