see - sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2013/june2013/186014.pdf
"x x x.
The petitioner’s allegation of non-payment is of no consequence taking into account the Municipal Voucher presented before the RTC, which
proves payment by the respondent of Three Thousand Pesos (P3,000.00).
The petitioner, notwithstanding the lack of the Municipal Treasurer’s
approval, admitted that the signature appearing on the Municipal Voucher was his and he is now estopped from disclaiming payment.
Even assuming, arguendo, that the petitioner was not paid, such non
payment is immaterial and has no effect on the validity of the contract of
sale. A contract of sale is a consensual contract and what is required is the
meeting of the minds on the object and the price for its perfection and
validity.38 In this case, the contract was perfected the moment the petitioner and the respondent agreed on the object of the sale – the two-hectare parcel of land, and the price – Three Thousand Pesos (P3,000.00). Non-payment of the purchase price merely gave rise to a right in favor of the petitioner to either demand specific performance or rescission of the contract of sale.
xx x."
