Yam v.

CA
G.R. No. 104726, February 11, 1999

FACTS: Victor Yam and Yek Sun Lent obtained a loan of P300,000 denominated as
Industrial Guarantee and Loan Fund (IGLF) from Manphil Investment Corporation. On
April 2, 1985, Manphil was placed under receivership by the Central Bank. Yam and
Sun paid on July 31, 1986 which was received by Central Bank. It contained a notation
on the voucher that there was already a full payment of IGLF loan.

Manphil filed a collection case against the two after they failed to pay the remaining
balance. The two contended that through Manphil’s president, it was agreed to condone
the penalties and service charges. The Regional Trial Court ruled in favor of Manphil,
which was sustained by the Court of Appeals. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE: May the Manphil Investment Corporation, through its president, condone
penalties and charges after it had been placed under receivership?

RULING: No. As held in Villanueva v. CA the appointment of a receiver operates to

suspend the authority of a corporation and of its directors and officers over its property
and effects, such authority being reposed in the receiver. Thus, its president had no
authority to condone the debt.