Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, the assailed decision dated September 4, 1998 is AFFIRMED with modifications (sic) that the awards for exemplary damages and attorney's fees are hereby deleted. Petitioner Metrobank is a banking institution duly organized and existing as such under Philippine laws. [2] Respondent Renato D. Cabilzo (Cabilzo) was one of Metrobank's clients who maintained a current account with Metrobank Pasong Tamo Branch.
WHEREFORE, the assailed decision dated September 4, 1998 is AFFIRMED with modifications (sic) that the awards for exemplary damages and attorney's fees are hereby deleted. Petitioner Metrobank is a banking institution duly organized and existing as such under Philippine laws. [2] Respondent Renato D. Cabilzo (Cabilzo) was one of Metrobank's clients who maintained a current account with Metrobank Pasong Tamo Branch. [3] On 12 November 1994, Cabilzo issued a Metrobank Check No. 985988, payable to "CASH" and postdated on 24 November 1994 in the amount of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) . The check was drawn against Cabilzo's Account with Metrobank Pasong Tamo Branch under Current Account No. 618044873-3 and was paid by Cabilzo to a certain Mr. Marquez, as his sales commission. [4] Subsequently, the check was presented to Westmont Bank for payment. Westmont Bank, in turn, indorsed the check to Metrobank for appropriate clearing. After the entries thereon were examined, including the availability of funds and the authenticity of the signature of the drawer, Metrobank cleared the check for encashment in accordance with the Philippine Clearing House Corporation (PCHC) Rules. On 16 November 1994, Cabilzo's representative was at Metrobank Pasong Tamo Branch to make some transaction when he was asked by a bank personnel if Cabilzo had issued a check in the amount of P91,000.00 to which the former replied in the negative. On the afternoon of the same date, Cabilzo himself called Metrobank to reiterate that he did not issue a check in the amount of P91,000.00 and requested that the questioned check be returned to him for verification, to which Metrobank complied. [5] Upon receipt of the check, Cabilzo discovered that Metrobank Check No. 985988 which he issued on 12 November 1994 in the amount of P1,000.00 was altered to P91,000.00 and the date 24 November 1994 was changed to 14 November 1994 . [6] Hence, Cabilzo demanded that Metrobank re-credit the amount of P91,000.00 to his account. Metrobank, however, refused reasoning that it has to refer the matter first to its Legal Division for appropriate action. Repeated verbal demands followed but Metrobank still failed to re-credit the amount of P91,000.00 to Cabilzo's account. [7] On 30 June 1995, Cabilzo, thru counsel, finally sent a letter-demand [8] to Metrobank for the payment of P90,000.00, after deducting the original value of the check in the amount of P1,000.00. Such written demand notwithstanding, Metrobank still failed or refused to comply with its obligation. Consequently, Cabilzo instituted a civil action for damages against Metrobank before the RTC of Manila, Branch 13. In his Complaint docketed as Civil Case No. 95-75651, Renato D. Cabilzo v. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company , Cabilzo prayed that in addition to his claim for reimbursement, actual and moral damages plus costs of the suit be awarded in his favor. [9] For its part, Metrobank countered that upon the receipt of the said check through
G.R. No. 152720 - SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, VS. SPOUSES TEODULFO AND CARMEN ARRIETA.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 152720 -
CaseG.R. No. 248821 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, VS. SPS. PEDRO CAGUIMBAL AND VIVIAN CAGUIMBAL.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 248821 -
CaseG.R. No. 205839 - LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. NARCISO L. KHO.[G.R. No. 205840] MA. LORENA FLORES AND ALEXANDER CRUZ, VS. NARCISO L. KHO.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 205839 -