SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. L-2395. December 29, 1906. ]
DOROTEO CORTES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DY-JIA AND DY-CHUANDING, Defendants-Appellants.
A. D. Gibbs, for Appellants.
Doreteo Cortes, in his own behalf .
SYLLABUS
LEASE; ASSIGNMENT; IMPLIED CONSENT. — A contract of lease provided for a forfeiture of the lessees’ rights if the lease was assigned without the lessor’s consent. An assignment was made without such consent in 1902. On January 10, 1904, the lessor, knowing that the lease had been assigned, received from the assignee the rent for said month of January, protesting at the time against the assignment. Hel, That the receipt of the rent was a waiver of the right to claim a forfeiture on account of such assignment.
D E C I S I O N
WILLARD, J.:
On the 25th of September, 1901, the plaintiff leased to the defendant Dy-Jia, and to one Dy-Guico, a tract of land in the city of Manila for five years from the 1st day of October, 1901, the lease terminating on the 30th day of September, 1906. Clause E of that contract is as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"E. Los arrendatarios bajo ningun pretexto no podran subarrendar la finca de que se trata ni hipotecar los edificios que se construyan, y si lo contrario hicieren quedara rescindido el presente contrato como si hubiesen transcurrido los cinco años estipulados, quedando en beneficio del solar todas las edificaciones construidas en el."cralaw virtua1aw library
The lessees entered into possession of the tract of land and erected thereon a building at a cost of about 11,000 pesos. The defendant Li Tsung Ling, sued under the name of Dy-Chuanding, alleged in his answer that the lessees, Dy-Jia and Dy-Guico, were merely agents of his in making this lease and constructing the building and that he was the real owner of the leasehold interest and of the said building. On the 31st of December, 1902, Dy-Guico signed a written statement in which he declared that the building belonged to the said defendant, Li Tsung Ling, and that the latter should pay the rent due under the lease to the plaintiff. On the 18th of May, 1903, Dy-Jia made a similar declaration in writing and assigned and transferred to the defendant Li Tsung Ling all his interest in the lot rented as aforesaid from the plaintiff. The defendant Li Tsung Ling paid the rent to the plaintiff from November, 1902, until January, 1904. The receipts which the plaintiff gave for this rent were made out in the name of Dy-Jia and Dy-Guico. It is claimed by the defendant that the plaintiff knew during his time that all the interest in the lease had been transferred by the lessees to him. That is denied by the plaintiff. We do not find it necessary, however, to decide this question of fact. On the 8th of January, 1904, the lawyer for the defendant Li Tsung Ling wrote a letter to the plaintiff in regard to the rent due for the month of January, in which the letter stated that the lessees were the agents of this client, the defendant Li Tsung Ling. The plaintiff testified that at once upon receipt of this letter he made investigations and learned, as he says, for the first time that the interest of the lessees had, in November, 1902, been transferred to the defendant Li Tsung Ling in violation, as he claims, of clause E above quoted from the contract of lease. On the 10th day of January, 1904, the defendant Li Tsung Ling paid to the plaintiff and the plaintiff received from him the rent for the month of January, and the plaintiff then gave a receipt, of which the following is a copy:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Recibi de Dy-Jia y Dy-Guico la cantidad de ciento y diez pesos, conant importe del alquiler del terreno en las calles de Poblete y Claveria que ocupa, correspondiente al presente mes.
"Manila, 1.
"E. Los arrendatarios bajo ningun pretexto no podran subarrendar la finca de que se trata ni hipotecar los edificios que se construyan, y si lo contrario hicieren quedara rescindido el presente contrato como si hubiesen transcurrido los cinco años estipulados, quedando en beneficio del solar todas las edificaciones construidas en el."cralaw virtua1aw library
The lessees entered into possession of the tract of land and erected thereon a building at a cost of about 11,000 pesos. The defendant Li Tsung Ling, sued under the name of Dy-Chuanding, alleged in his answer that the lessees, Dy-Jia and Dy-Guico, were merely agents of his in making this lease and constructing the building and that he was the real owner of the leasehold interest and of the said building. On the 31st of December, 1902, Dy-Guico signed a written statement in which he declared that the building belonged to the said defendant, Li Tsung Ling, and that the latter should pay the rent due under the lease to the plaintiff. On the 18th of May, 1903, Dy-Jia made a similar declaration in writing and assigned and transferred to the defendant Li Tsung Ling all his interest in the lot rented as aforesaid from the plaintiff. The defendant Li Tsung Ling paid the rent to the plaintiff from November, 1902, until January, 1904. The receipts which the plaintiff gave for this rent were made out in the name of Dy-Jia and Dy-Guico. It is claimed by the defendant that the plaintiff knew during his time that all the interest in the lease had been transferred by the lessees to him. That is denied by the plaintiff. We do not find it necessary, however, to decide this question of fact. On the 8th of January, 1904, the lawyer for the defendant Li Tsung Ling wrote a letter to the plaintiff in regard to the rent due for the month of January, in which the letter stated that the lessees were the agents of this client, the defendant Li Tsung Ling. The plaintiff testified that at once upon receipt of this letter he made investigations and learned, as he says, for the first time that the interest of the lessees had, in November, 1902, been transferred to the defendant Li Tsung Ling in violation, as he claims, of clause E above quoted from the contract of lease. On the 10th day of January, 1904, the defendant Li Tsung Ling paid to the plaintiff and the plaintiff received from him the rent for the month of January, and the plaintiff then gave a receipt, of which the following is a copy:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Recibi de Dy-Jia y Dy-Guico la cantidad de ciento y diez pesos, conant importe del alquiler del terreno en las calles de Poblete y Claveria que ocupa, correspondiente al presente mes.
"Manila, 1.
