Short answer. Yes, presumptively. Rule 131, Section 3 of the Rules of Court presumes That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later one is produced. It is a disputable presumption, so the landlord can still overcome it with evidence that earlier months went unpaid.
What the law says
That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later one is produced
Rule 131, Section 3 — Disputable presumptions. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence
Rule 131, Section 3 — Disputable presumptions. Read the full provision →
What the presumption does for you
A tenant sued for a year of arrears is in an awkward position: proving you paid ten separate months means producing ten separate receipts, and receipts get lost. This clause fixes that by letting the latest receipt speak for the ones before it. Produce the receipt for the later payment and the earlier rents or instalments are taken as paid, without you having to document each one. The same rule works for instalment buyers, not just tenants — the text covers rents or installments alike.
"Disputable" is the key word
Section 3 opens by saying these presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence. So this is not a rule that ends the argument. It shifts the burden: instead of the tenant proving every earlier payment, the landlord must come forward with evidence that a particular earlier month was not in fact paid. Ledgers, demand letters written at the time, or an acknowledgment of arrears can do that. What the presumption prevents is a claim built on nothing more than the tenant's inability to find old paper.
The receipt has to be for a later period
The presumption runs backwards in time from a later receipt to earlier ones, and that direction matters. A receipt for March does nothing for April. It also helps to have a receipt that identifies the period it covers: a document showing only an amount and a date, with no indication of which month it settles, gives a court much less to work backwards from. When you pay, ask for the period to be written on the receipt — that single habit is what makes this rule usable years later.
Where the presumption will not save you
Payments made partially, or applied by agreement to something other than rent, sit outside the clean case the clause describes. So do arrangements where rent was deferred rather than paid. And because the presumption is disputable, a landlord who kept careful contemporaneous records can usually meet it. The lesson runs both ways: tenants should keep the most recent receipt above all others, and landlords who allow arrears to run should document them as they happen rather than at the point of suing.