Elizabeth del Carmen v. Spouses Restituto Sabordo

Summary

This case involves the validity of judicial consignation as payment for property purchase rights. The Suico spouses' heirs, following a 1990 CA decision granting them the right to repurchase Lots 506 and 514 for P127,500, deposited this amount with the RTC claiming valid consignation after discovering the lots were mortgaged to a bank. The Supreme Court denied their petition, affirming lower courts' rulings that the deposit was invalid consignation because it lacked the mandatory prior tender of payment to the respondent lot owners. The Court emphasized that strict compliance with Civil Code requirements for consignation is mandatory, and mere judicial deposit without proper tender does not effect payment. The decision clarifies the distinction between tender of payment and consignation, reinforcing that consignation is necessarily judicial but must be preceded by valid tender except in specific statutory exceptions, none of which applied here.