EN BANC
G.R. No. L-42462
August 31, 1937
THE BACHRACH MOTOR CO., INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, vs.
MARIANO LACSON LEDESMA, TALISAY-SILAY MILLING CO., INC., and THE PHILIPPINE
NATIONAL BANK, Defendant-Appellees.
IMPERIAL, J.:
This is an action brought by the plaintiff to recover the
amount of the judgments obtained by it in civil cases Nos. 31597 and 31821 of
the Court of First Instance of Manila, praying in its complaint: (a) That the
transfer of certificate of stock dividends No. 772 of the Talisay-Silay Milling
of the Philippine National Bank, be declared null and void, as against the
plaintiff: (b) that the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., ordered to cancel the
entry of the transfer of the 6,300 stock dividends covered by certificate No.
772, made by it on its books in favor of the Philippine National Bank; (c) that
said stock dividends be sold to satisfy the judgment obtained by it in civil
cases Nos. 31597 of the Court of First Instance of Manila; (d) that the
Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., be ordered to pay to it amount of P21,379.39,
with interest on the sums and from the dates set forth in paragraph XV of the
complain, or any part thereof necessary to complete payment of said sums and
interest thereon , in case the 6,300 stock dividends can not be sold or the
proceeds of the sale thereof should be insufficient to cover the sums in
question, and (e) that the defendants pay the costs of the suit. The plaintiff
appealed from the judgment declaring the right of the Philippine National Bank
to the 6,300 stock dividends a preferred one, and absolving the defendants from
the complaint, with costs.
The parties submitted the case upon the following
stipulation of facts, to wit:
STIPULATION OF FACTS. - That the plaintiff, the Bachrach
Motor Co., Inc., on June 30, 1927, obtained judgment in civil case No. 31597 of
the Court of First Instance of Manila against the defendant Mariano Lacson
Ledesma, in the sum of P3,442.75, with interest thereon from March 30, 1927,
with costs. That a writ of execution of said judgment was issued on August 20,
1927, and Jose Y. Orosa was appointed Special sheriff to execute it. That on
October 4, 1927, said Jose Y. Orosa, as special sheriff, in compliance with the
writ of execution in question, attached all right, title to and interest which
the defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma may have in "Any bonus, dividend, share
of stock, money, or other property which that defendant is entitle to receive
from the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., by virtue of the fact that such
defendant has mortgage his land in favor of the Philippine National Bank to
guarantee the indebtedness of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., or which
such defendant is entitled to receive from the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc.,
on account of being a stockholder in the corporation or which he is entitled to
receive from that corporation for any other cause or pretext whatsoever."
That notice of said attachment was served not only upon the defendant Mariano
Lacson Ledesma but also upon the herein defendant the Talisay-Silay Milling
Co., Inc., which received a copy of the notice of attachment, as evidenced by
the Annex A attached to this stipulation of facts. That on October 3, 1927, the
herein plaintiff, the Bachrach Motor Co., Inc., obtained judgment in case No.
31821 of the Court of First Instance of Manila against the defendant Mariano
Lacson Ledesma, in the sum of four thousand four hundred pesos and
seventy-eight centavos with interest at 10 per cent per annum on the sum of
P3,523.82 from April 30, 1927; in the sum of P14,171, 52 with interest at 10
per cent per annum on the sum of P13,290.89 from April 30, 1927; and in the sum
of P1,150.72 with the legal interest of 6 per cent per annum thereon from May
25, 1927, and the costs. A copy of said judgment is attached to this
stipulation of facts and marked Annex B. That a writ of execution of said
judgment was issue, thereby causing the attachment, sale and adjudication to
the plaintiff the Bachrach Motor Co., Inc., for the sum of P100, Philippine
currency, of the defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma's right of redemption over
the following properties to wit: "Original certificate of title No. 1929
(Lot No. 1473 of the Cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing an area of 2,647
square meters, more or less.
Original certificate of title No. 2978 (Lot No. 1475 of the
Cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing an area of 8.501 square meters, more or
less.
Original certificate of title No. 2624 (Lot No. 1474 of the
Cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing an area of 8,714 square meter, more or
less.
Original
certificate of title No. 9443 (Lot No. 426 of the Cadastral Survey of Talisay)
containing an area of 150,301 square meters more or less. Original certificate
of title No. 1928 (Lot No. 1472 of the Cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing
an area of 36,818 square meters, more or less. Original certificate of title
No. 2923 (Lot No. 1489 of the Cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing an area
of 286,879 square meters, more or less. Original certificate of title No. 356
(Lot No. 4-A of the Cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing an area of 641,448
square meters, more or less. Original certificate of title No. 356 (Lot No. 4-B
of the Cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing an area of 280,556 square
meters, more or less. Original certificate of title No. 356 (Lot No. 4-C of the
cadastral Survey of Bacolod) containing an area of 2,842,946 square meters,
more or less." The certificate of sale issued by the provincial sheriff of
Occidental Negros in favor of the Bachrach Motor Co., Inc., on March 29, 1928,
is attached to this stipulation of facts, and marked Annex C. That on the date
of the issuance of the execution in case No. 31597 of the Court of First
Instance of Manila as well as on that of the issuance of the execution and sale
of the properties described in Exhibit C, in case No. 31821 of the same court,
said real properties were mortgaged to the Philippine National Bank to secure
the payment to said bank by Mariano Lacson Ledesma of the sum of P624,000,
Philippine currency, by virtue of an instrument executed by the debtor Mariano
Lacson Ledesma in favor of said bank on August 9, 1923. said instrument of
mortgage is copied on pages 18 to 32, both inclusive, of the bill of exceptions
in case No. 8136 of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo (G. R. No. 35223),
which is attached to this stipulation of facts and marked Annex D. That in the
same instrument of mortgage (pages 18 to 32 of Annex D) said debtor Mariano
Lacson Ledesma mortgaged in favor the bank, as part of the securities to ensure
compliance with his obligation, the following shares owned by him in the
Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., to wit: 1,540 share covered by Certificate No.
147; 520 shares covered by Certificate No. 146; 40 share covered by Certificate
in the preceeding two paragraph, there was another mortgage constituted on the
above-described real properties in favor of the Philippine National Bank, to
answer for the debts contracted by the Central Talisay-Silay Milling Co., with
said bank. That on December 22, 1923, the defendant, Central Talisay-Silay
Milling Co. resolved to grant a bonus or compensation to the owners of the real
properties mortgaged to answer for the debts contracted by said central with
the Philippine National Bank, for the risk incurred by said properties upon
being subjected to said mortgage lien, and the resolution in question the
defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma was allotted the sum of P19,911.11, Philippine
currency, which sum, however, would not be payable until the month of January,
1930. That on September 29, 1928, the Philippine National Bank brought an
action against the defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma and his wife Concepcion
Diaz for the recovery of a mortgage credit which, together with interest
thereon amounted to P853,729.49 on said date. Sometime later that is, on
January 2, 1929, the Philippine National Bank amended its complaint by
including the Bachrach Motor Co., Inc., as party defendant, among other,
because they claim to have some right to certain properties which are the
subject matter of this complaint." Said case bears No. 4706 of the Court
of First Instance of Occidental Negros. That on January 30, 1929, the defendant
Bachrach Motor Co., Inc., file a general denial. That after due hearing the
Court of First Instance of Bacolod on September 3, 1930, rendered judgment in
case No. 4706 of said court in favor of the Philippine National Bank and
against the defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma, sentencing the latter to pay the
amount claimed by said bank and ordering, upon failure to satisfy said amount,
the sale at public auction of the real properties mortgaged under the
instrument of mortgage appearing on pages 18 to 32 of Annex D. That the real
estate and chattel mortgage deed in question (pages 18 to 32 of Annex D),
marked as Exhibit G, was among the exhibits presented in said case No. 4706 of
the Court of First Instance of Occidental Negros. That likewise, among the
exhibit presented in said case No. 4706 of the Court of First Instance of
Occidental Negros, was Exhibit H which was a deed of mortgage of certain
carabaos belonging to the debtor Mariano Lacson Ledesma, executed by the latter
in favor of the Philippine National Bank on January 21, 1925. That in the
decision rendered by the Court of First Instance of Occidental Negros in case
No. 4706 thereof, said court, referring to stock certificates Nos. 145 and 147
of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., which were pledged or mortgaged by
virtue of Exhibit G of said No. 4706, rendered the following ruling: "(e)
With respect to the chattel mortgaged bank, which are described in Exhibit G
and H, the Philippine National Bank, as soon as this judgment becomes final,
shall have authority to sell them in accordance with the provisions of section
23 of Act No. 2938, immediately informing this court of whatever action it may
take in the premises." That during the pendency of case No. 4706 of the
Court of First Instance of Bacolod referred to in the foregoing paragraphs, the
plaintiff Bachrach Motor Co., Inc., on December 20, 1929, brought an action in
the Court of First Instance of Iloilo against the Talisay-Silay Milling Co.,
Inc., recover from it the sum of P13,850 against the bonus or dividend which,
by virtue of the resolution of December 22, 1923, said Central Talisay-Silay
Milling Co., Inc., had declared in favor of the defendant Mariano Lacson
Ledesma as one of the owners of the hacienda which had been mortgaged to the
Philippine National Bank to secure the obligation of the Talisay-Silay Milling
Co., Inc. in favor of said bank. Copy of said complaint appears on pages 2 to 5
of the bill of exceptions in case No. 8136 of the Court of First Instance of
Iloilo (G. R. No. 35223), Annex D of this stipulation of facts. That on January
30, 1930, the Philippine National Bank sought permission to intervene in said
case No. 8136 of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo and after the permission
had been granted, said bank, on February 13, 1930, filed a complaint in
intervention alleging that it had a preferred right to said bonus granted by
the central to the defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma as one of the owners of the
haciendas which had been mortgaged to said bank to answer for the obligations
of the Central Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., basing such allegation on the
fact that, as said properties were mortgaged to it by the debtor Mariano Lacson
Ledesma, not Talisay Milling Co., Inc., but also by virtue of the deed of
August 9, 1923 (pages 18 to 32 of Annex D) and said bonus being a civil fruit
of the mortgaged lands, said bank was entitled to it on the ground that the
mortgage of August 9, 1923, had become due. That after the trial of civil case
No. 8136 of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, said court, on December 8,
1930, rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff Bachrach Motor Co., Inc.,
Upon appeal, the Supreme Court, on September 17, 1931, 1 affirmed the judgment
of the lower court, holding that the bonus had no immediate relation to the
lands in question but merely a remote and accidental one and, therefore, it was
not a civil fruit of the real properties mortgaged to the Philippine National
Bank to secure the obligation of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., being a
mere personal right of Mariano Lacson Ledesma. The decision of the Supreme
Court published in Volume 30, No. 104, of the Official Gazette, on August 29,
1932, is attached to this stipulation of facts and marked Annex E. That on
January 24, 1930, that Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., issued stock
certificate No. 772 for 3,600 shares, as stock dividend to Mariano Lacson
Ledesma, which certificate was ordered by Mariano Lacson Ledesma to be
delivered to Roman Lacson, attorney for the Philippine National Bank, by virtue
of the letter of February 27, 1930, Annex G of this stipulation of facts, and
of the letter of the Philippine National Bank dated January 18, 1930, Annex
G-1. Said 6,300 shares constituted the stock dividend allotted to Mariano
Lacson Ledesma for his 2,100 original shares in the Talisay-Silay Milling Co.,
Inc., which were given as pledge to the Philippine National Bank under the deed
of mortgage appearing on pages 18 to 32 of Annex D prior to the issuance of
stock certificate No. 772, an were covered by Stock Certificates Nos. 145, 146
and 147 of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc. That stock certificate No. 772
was issued by virtue of resolution No. 4 of the general meeting of stockholders
of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., which resolution is quote in paragraph
8 of the complaint in this case. That in a letter of March 25, 1930, addressed
by the Philippine National Bank to the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., said bank
informed the letter that the 6,300 shares represented by stock certificate No.
772 had been given by Mariano Lacson Ledesma as pledge to the Philippine
National Bank. Said letter is attached to this stipulation of facts as Annex H.
That said stock certificate No. 772 has continuously been in the possession of
the Philippine National Bank from February 27, 1930, to February 25, 1931, but
like stock certificates Nos. 145, 146 and 147, it was registered in the books
of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co. in the name of Mariano Lacson Ledesma. That on
August 11, 1930, the plaintiff Bachrach Motor Co., by virtue of an alias
execution issued in case No. 31821 of the Court of First Instance of Manila, attached
all right, title to an interest which the defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma
might have in Any bonus, dividend, shares of stock, money or other property
specially on the sum of P19,911.11 which the defendant is entitled to receive
from the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., by virtue of the fact that such
defendant has mortgage his lands in favor of the Philippine National Bank to
guarantee the indebtedness of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., or which
such defendant is entitled to receive from the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc.,
on account of being stockholder in that corporation, or which he is entitle to
receive from that corporation for any other cause or pretext whatsoever."
In connection with the proceedings and attachment made notice of garnishment
was served on the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., as evidence by Annexes I and
J of this stipulation of facts. That on February 5, 1931, the provincial the is
positive part of the decision rendered in civil case NO. 4706 of the Court of
First Instance of Occidental Negros, copy of which is attached to this
stipulation of facts as Annex I, sold at public auction not only the 2,100
share specified in the deed of August 9, 1923, but also the 6,300 shares
covered by stock certificate No. 772, the sale of said shares having been made
by order and under the direction of the attachment creditor Philippine National
Bank. A copy of the certificate of sale marked Exhibit K is attached hereto.
That on February 25, 1931, the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., upon petition
of the Philippine National Bank, as shown by the letter dated February 19,1931,
marked and attached to this stipulation as Annex L, which letter was
accompanied by the certificate of sale Exhibit K, issued stock certificate No.
1155 representing 8,968 shares, which include the 6,300 shares formerly
represented by stock certificate No. 772 and the 2,100 shares formerly
represented by stock certificates Nos. 145, 146 and 147, the bank having
acknowledged receipt of certificate No. 1155 in a letter of March 4, 1931,
marked as Exhibit M. Attention is invited to the fact that of the 8,969 shares
represented by stock certificate No. 1155, 568 shares formerly belonged to
Concepcion Diaz e Lacson wife of the defendant Mariano Lacson Ledesma, and of
the 568 shares, 142 were mortgaged under the deed of August 9, 1923, and 426
were the stock dividend that had corresponded to said 142 shares. That on the
same date, February 25,1931, Marino Lacson Ledesma endorsed the back of stock
certificate No. 772 in favor of the Philippine National Bank. Said stock
certificate with the endorsement in question is attached to this stipulation of
facts and marked Annex N. That both on the date on which the garnishment was
carried out by the Bachrach Motor Co., that is, on August 11, 1930, and on the
date on which the 6,300 shares, covered by stock certificate No. 772, were
sold, case No. 8136 of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo (G. R. No. 35223)
was still pending. That the amount of the actual indebtedness of the defendant Mariano
Lacson Ledesma to the plaintiff the Bachrach Motor Co. is P21,377.34 with the
interest and other sums specified in paragraph XV of the complaint. That the
real properties mortgaged to the Philippine National Bank were sold for
P300,000 Philippine currency; the mortgaged carabaos for P2,000 Philippine
currency, and all the shares, that is, the 8,968 share for the sum of P90,000
Philippine currency, the bank having been the highest bidder herein all these
sales, there still remaining unpaid in civil case No. 4796 of the Court of
First Instance of Occidental Negros the sum of P695,421.74, as stated in Annex
9. That the notices of garnishment issue by virtue of the execution in cases
Nos. 31597 and 31821 of the Court of First Instance of Manila are the same
notices of attachment and garnishment mentioned in the complaint in the case
No. 8136 of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo and presented as evidence in
said case, and are the same notices mentioned in this case now submitted to the
court for decision. That on March 20,1925, the Philippine National Bank served
notice on the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc, of the pledge made by Mariano
Lacson Ledesma to said bank of the shares represented by stock certificates
Nos. 145, 146 and 147, and on March 25th the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc.,
acknowledged receipt thereof and considered itself notified of said pledge, as
evidenced by Annexes P and Q of this stipulation of facts, That prior to the
declaration of stock divided by virtue of resolution No. 4 of the regular
meeting of stockholders of the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc., the shares of
this corporation were quote in private sales at P32 a share; and immediately
after the declaration of stock dividend, the quotation of said shares dropped
by P7 or P8 a share, the same having been P11.25 a share on the date of their
sale at public auction. Upon this stipulation of facts, the parties submit the
case to the court for decision.
I. The plaintiff bases the preferred right invoked by it
over the 6,300 stock dividends, certificate No. 772, on the garnishment made
thereon by reason of the issuance of the alias execution in civil case No.
31821 of the Court of First Instance of Manila, which garnishment was carried
out on August 11, 1930. The plaintiff contends in its first assignment of error
that these stock dividends were certificate No. 772 thereof was delivered to
the Philippine National Bank and when the Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc.,
entered them in its books in the name of said bank and issued certificate No.
1166 in favor of the latter. The contention is unfounded because it appears
that the stock dividends in question were pledged to the bank prior to the
garnishment and because certificate No. 772 was in the possession of said bank
from February 27, 1930. The reasons upon which this court base its opinion in
declaring that the stock dividends were pledge beforehand to the Philippine
National Bank will be stated in the discussion of the following assignment of
error.
II. In the stipulation of facts, it appears stipulated by
the parties that, by virtue of the letters of the Philippine National Bank and
having been so asked by Mariano Lacson Ledesma, certificate No. 772 covering
the 6,300 stock dividends was delivered as security to Attorney Roman Lacson as
representative of the bank, on February 27, 1930, in view of the fact that the
original shares covered by certificate Nos. 145, 146 and 147 had been
previously mortgaged to the same bank. On February 25, 1931, the Talisay-Silay
Milling Co., Inc., in conformity with the letter of the Philippines National
Bank of the 19th of said month, cancelled certificate No. 772 and in lieu
thereof issued certificate No. 1155 in favor of said bank, which certificate
includes the 6,300 stock dividends, among other shares. On the other hand, the
garnishment obtained by the plaintiff, upon which it bases all its alleged
preferred right was notified to the parties and became effective on August 11,
1930, more than five months after the delivery of certificate No. 772. The
plaintiff, in its second assignment of error, maintains that the pledge is
ineffective as against it because evidence of its date was not made to appear
in a public instrument and concludes that its right to the 6,300 stock
dividends is superior and preferred. It is admitted that the delivery of the
certificate in question and the pledge thereof were not made to appear in a
public instrument.
It is true, according to article 1865 of the Civil Code,
that in order that a pledge may be effective as against third person, evidence
of its date must appear in a public instrument in addition to the delivery of
the thing pledged to the creditor. This provision has been interpreted in the
sense that for the contract to affect third person, it must appear in a public
instrument in addition to delivery of the thing pledged (Ocejo, Perez and Co.,
vs. International Banking Corporation, 37 Phil., 631: Tec Bi & Co. vs.
Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China, 41 Phil., 596; Te Pate vs.
Ingersoll, 43 Phil., 394). It cannot be denied, however, that section 4 of Act
No. 1508, otherwise known as the Chattel Mortgage Law, implicitly modified
article 1865 of the Civil Code in the sense that a contract of pledge and that
of chattel mortgage, to be effective as against third persons, need not appear
in public instruments provided the thing pledged or mortgaged be delivered or
placed in the possession of the creditor. In the case of Mahoney vs. Tuason (39
Phil., 952, 958), where this doctrine was laid down, it was stated; "From
the foregoing provisions of the abovecited Act, it is inferred that the same
does not entirely repeal the provisions of the Civil Code, but only modify them
in part and amplify them in another, as may be seen from an examination of, and
comparison between, the provisions of the Civil Code regarding pledge and the
abovequoted provisions of Act No. 1508. Article 1865 of the Civil Code provides
that no pledge shall be effective against a third person unless evidence of its
date appears in a public instrument. The provision of this article has,
undoubtedly, been modified by section 4 of the Chattel Mortgage Law, in so far
as it provides that a chattel mortgage shall not be valid against any person
except the mortgagor, his executors or administrators, unless the possession of
the property is delivered to and retained by the mortgagee or unless the
mortgage is recorded in the office of the register of deeds of the province in
which the mortgagor resides. From the date the said Act No. 1508 was in force,
a contract of pledge or chattel mortgage should be deemed legally entered into
and should produce all its effects and consequences, provided it appears to
have been in some manner perfected and that the things pledged have been
delivered, and in a contrary case, and even if the creditor has not received
them or has not retained them in his custody, provided that the contract of
pledge or chattel mortgage appears in a notarial document and is inscribed in
the registry of deeds of the province." Therefore, this court holds that
the pledge of the 6,300 stock dividends is valid against the plaintiff for the
reason that the certificate was delivered to the creditor bank, notwithstanding
the fact that the contract does not appear in a public instrument.
The plaintiff further contends that the pledge could not
legally exist because the certificate was not the shares themselves, making it
understood that a certificate of stock or of stock dividends can not be the
subject matter of the contract of pledge or of chattel mortgage. Neither is
this contention tenable. Certificates of stock or of stock dividends, under the
Corporation Law, are quasi negotiable instruments in the sense that they may be
given in pledge or mortgage to secure an obligation. The question is settled in
this wise by the weight of American authorities and it is the modern doctrine
of general acceptance by the courts.
In view, however,
of the fact that certificates of stock, while not negotiable in the sense of
the law merchant, like bills and notes, are so framed and dealt with as to be
transferable, when property endorsed, by mere delivery, and as they frequently
convey, by estoppel against the corporation or against prior holders, as good a
title to the transferee as if they were negotiable, and inasmuch as a large
commercial use is made of such certificates as collateral security, and it is
to the public interest that such use should be simplify and facilitated by
placing them as nearly as possible on the plane of commercial paper, they are
often spoken of and treated as quasi negotiable, that is as having some of the
attributes and partaking of the character of negotiable instruments, in passing
from hand to hand, especially where they are accompanied by an assignment and
power of attorney, executed in blank, to transfer them to anyone who may obtain
possession as holders, even though such assignment and power are under seal.
(14 C. J., 665, sec 1034; South Bend First Nat. Bank vs. Lanier, 20 Law. ed.,
172; Weniger vs. Success Min. Co., 227 Fedd., 548; Scott vs. Pequonnock Nat.
Bank, 15 Fed., 494.)
III. In the third assignment of error, the plaintiff
maintains that the court erred in holding that the stock dividends are civil
fruits or an extension of the original shares. This court deems it unnecessary
to determine whether or not the stock devidends are civil fruits or an
extension of the original shares. This point becomes immaterial after the case
has been decided in the manner stated in the discussion of the second
assignment of error .
IV. In the forth assignment of error, the plaintiff contends
that court erred in not declaring null and void the sale of the 6,300 stock
dividends in execution of the judgment rendered in favor of the Philippine
National Bank in civil case No. 4706 of the Court of First Instance of
Occidental Negros. Inasmuch as this court has declared that the stock dividends
in question were pledged to the bank, it follows that the sale thereof in
execution of said judgment is legal and valid.
V. In the fifth assignment of error, the plaintiff argues
that the court erred in declaring the Philippine National Bank's right to the
stock dividends a preferred one. After it has been held that these stock
dividends had been pledged to the Philippine National Bank and that this
contract was prior to the garnishment of the plaintiff, it appear clear that
the court violated no law in holding the right of the Philippine National Bank,
as pledgee, a superior one.
VI. The plaintiff assigns as sixth and last error committed
by the court the fact of its having absolved all the defendants. The case
having been decided in favor of the Philippine National Bank, on the grounds
stated in passing upon the second assignment of error, the absolution of the
defendants is unavoidable, thereby making this last assignment of error
likewise untenable.
For the foregoing consideration the appealed judgment is
affirmed, with the costs of this instance to the plaintiff-appellant. So
ordered.
