This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-09-24 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| When PNB and the respondents entered into the First, Second and Third Amendments on January 31, 1992, October 28, 1992 and November 3, 1993, respectively, they undertook reciprocal obligations. In reciprocal obligations, the obligation or promise of each party is the consideration for that of the other; and when one party has performed or is ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, the other party who has not performed or is not ready and willing to perform incurs in delay.[21] The promise of the respondents to pay was the consideration for the obligation of PNB to furnish the P40,000,000.00 additional loan under the First Amendment as well as the P55,000,000.00 the second additional loan under the Third Amendment. When the respondents executed the Supplement to REM covering their Greenhills property, they signified their willingness to pay the additional loans. It should be noted, as correctly found by the CA, that the Supplement to REM was constituted not only as security for the execution of the First Amendment but also in consideration of the Second and Third Amendments. The provisions of the Third Amendment read in part: SECTION 2. THE AMENDMENTS | |||||