Azcona v.

Jamandre 127 SCRA 828

Facts

Guillermo Azcona leased 80 hectares out of his 150 hectare share in Hacienda Sta. Fe in
NegrosOccidental to Cirilo Jamandre. The agreed yearly rental was P7200 and the term was for
3agricultural years beginning 1960. On March 30, 1960, when the first annual rent was due,petitioner was
not able to deliver possession of the leased property thus he “waived” payment of that rental. Respondent
only entered the premises on October 26, 1960 after paying P7000, whichwas acknowledged by the
petitioner in the receipt. On April 6, 1961, the petitioner notifiedrespondent that the contract of lease was
deemed cancelled for violation of the conditions of thecontract. Earlier, in fact, the respondent had been
ousted from the possession of the 60 hectaresof the leased premises and let with only 20 hectares of the
original area.

Issues

Whether or not the lease contract is deemed cancelled upon failure of the respondent to: 1. Attach the
parcelary plan identifying the exact area subject of the contract 2. Secure approval of PNB of said
contract 3. Pay the rentals Ruling Parcelary Plan The correct view is that there was an agreed subject-
matter, although it was not expressly defined because the plan was not annexed and never approved.
There was still an ascertainable object because the leased premises were sufficiently delineated and
identified. Failure to attach the plan was imputable to the petitioner himself because he was supposed to
prepare the said plan. Nevertheless, the identification of the lease area rendered the plan unnecessary
and its absence did not nullify the agreement. PNB Approval Petitioners claim that such possession was
not delivered because the approval of by the PNB had not materialized due to respondent's neglect.
Respondent was negotiating the loan with PNB but the contract does not state upon whom fell the
obligation to secure the approval. Payment of Rent. Petitioner contends that the payment of P7000, which
was short of P200, was a violation of the agreement thus the contract should be deemed cancelled. But
the petitioner unqualifiedly accepted the amount. The absence of any mention of the discrepancy in the
receipt nor any protest or demand to collect the remaining balance, means that petitioner acknowledged
the amount as the full payment for the rent. The SC affirms the decision of the CA and petition is denied.

Note:

The CA held that the amount of P200 had been condoned but the SC viewed it as a mere reduction of the
stipulated rental in consideration of the withdrawal from the leased premises where the petitioner
intended to graze his cattle. Relevant Articles/ Jurisprudence Art 1235 – When the obligee accepts the
performance, knowing its incompleteness or irregularity, and without expressing any protest or objection,
the obligation is deemed fully complied with