Cred Trans 9.1

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

1/17

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS (Atty. Jazzie Sarona-Lozare)REAL MORTGAGE & CHATTEL MORTGAGE CASES

1

UNION BANK v. CA

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 133366 August 5, 1999

UNIONBANK OF THE PHIIPPINES,petitioner,

vs.

THE COURT OF APPEAS !"# FERMINA S. $ARIO !"#

RE%NA$O S. $ARIO,respondents.

$A&I$E, 'R.,CJ.:

nionban! of the Philippines "hereafter NION#$N%&

appeals, b' (a' of certiorari, the Decision)of the *ourt of

$ppeals "*$& of + -une )/ and its Resolution of / $pril

)0+. The *$ nullified the Re1ional Trial *ourt2s "RT*&

Order3 of / $u1ust )4 den'in1 private respondents2

application for preli5inar' in6unction as NION#$N%2s

consolidation of o(nership divested private respondents of

their propert' (ithout due process of la(. It also ordered the

re1ister of deeds to cancel NION#$N%2s title and the trial

court to hear private respondents pra'er for in6unctive

relief.1wphi1.nt

This case ste55ed fro5 a real estate 5ort1a1e e7ecuted on

)/ Dece5ber )) b' spouses 8eopoldo and -essica Dario

"hereafter 5ort1a1ors& in favor of NION#$N% to secure a

P3 5illion loan, includin1 interest and other char1es. The

5ort1a1e covered a 9ue:on *it' propert' (ith Transfer

*ertificate of Title "T*T& No. ;)0+0 in 8eopoldo Dario2s

na5e and (as annotated on the title on )0 Dece5ber )).

For nonuisites of *ircular ;uire5ents of S* $d5inistrative

*ircular ;

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

2/17


2

On ) Ma' )4, private respondents 5oved to declare the

other defendants in default for their nonuestioned, NION#$N% too!

advanta1e of private respondents2 procedural error b'

consolidatin1 title to the propert', (hich @s5ac!AedB of bad

faith@ and @evinceAdB a reprobate disposition of the part of its

counsel to advance his client2s cause b' fair 5eans or foul.@

$s a result thereof the transfer of title (as vitiated b' nonuired b' petitioner Philbancor at public

auction.1wphi1.nt

The facts, as found b' the *ourt of $ppeals, are as follo(sG

Private respondents $lfredo Pare, Pablo Halan1 and $5ado

Vie, as plaintiffs, filed (ith the Provincial $1rarian Refor5

$d6udication #oard "P$R$#& a co5plaint for 5aintenance of

possession (ith rede5ption and tenanc' ri1ht of preuestion to

be conve'ed to and redee5ed b' the plaintiffsE

The counterclai5 of the defendant Philbancor Finance, Inc.

is hereb' dis5issed. "Ibid., pp. 0)

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

5/17


5

On $pril )0, )/, petitioners filed (ith the *ourt of $ppeals

a 5otion for reconsideration of the decisionE ho(ever, on

Ma' ), )/, the *ourt of $ppeals denied the 5otion.4

?ence, this appeal.

The petition raises three issuesE ho(ever, the last issue

raised is decisive, hence, onl' this issue is herein resolved,

that is, (hether or not the private respondents could still

e7ercise their ri1ht of rede5ption of the parcels of land sold

at public auction due to foreclosure of the 5ort1a1es thereon

considerin1 that the' invo!ed their ri1ht to redee5 onl' on

-ul' );, )+, seven 'ears after the date of re1istration of

the certificate of sale (ith the Re1ister of Deeds.

Ce 1rant the petition.

Republic $ct No. 30;;, Section )+, provides as follo(sG

In case the landholdin1 is sold to a third person (ithout the

!no(led1e of the a1ricultural lessee, the latter shall have the

ri1ht to redee5 the sa5e at a reasonable price and

consideration. Provided, that the entire landholdin1 sold

5ust be redee5ed. Provided further, that (here there are

t(o or 5ore a1ricultural lessees, each shall be entitled to

said ri1ht of rede5ption onl' to the e7tent of the area

actuall' cultivated b' hi5. The ri1ht of rede5ption under this

section 5a' be e7ercised (ithin t(o "+& 'ears fro5 the

re1istration of the sale and shall have priorit' over an' other

ri1ht of le1al rede5ption./

In this case, the certificate of sale of the sub6ect propert',

(hich (as sold at public auction, (as re1istered (ith the

Re1ister of Deeds of Pa5pan1a on -ul' 3), )04.0The t(ouent issuance of the

certificate of rede5ption in its favor. Nevertheless,

respondentJs subse>uent tender of pa'5ent (as also

denied.

*onse>uentl', respondent filed a Petition for Manda5us (ith

Pra'er for Issuance of a Te5porar' Restrainin1 Order and a

Crit of Preli5inar' In6unction3before the RT*. Petitioners

contended, a5on1 other thin1s, that it had until Februar' )=,

+==4, or one ")& 'ear fro5 the date of re1istration of the

certificate of sale on Februar' )=, +==;, (ithin (hich to

redee5 the sub6ect properties, pursuant to Section /0 of

Presidential Decree "P.D.& No. ;; or the Real Propert' Ta7*ode.

$fter the parties filed their respective pleadin1s, the RT*

initiall' denied the petition in the Order;dated Dece5ber ,

+==;. In den'in1 the petition, the RT* opined that

respondentJs reliance on Section /0 of P.D. No. ;; as basis

of the rec!onin1 period in countin1 the one ")& 'ear period

(ithin (hich to redee5 the sub6ect properties (as

5isplaced, since P.D. No. ;; has been e7pressl' repealed

b' Republic $ct "R.$.& No. /)=, or the 8ocal Hovern5ent

*ode.

$11rieved, respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration4

>uestionin1 the Order, ar1uin1 thatG

$.

The ?onorable *ourt co55itted 1rave error (hen it

su55aril' denied the petition for Manda5us filed b' herein

petitioner durin1 the hearin1 on the Motion for Issuance of

Te5porar' Restrainin1 Order andKor Issuance of a Crit of

Preli5inar' In6unction (ithout conductin1 a hearin1 or trial on

petition for 5anda5us. The order of the court effectivel'

denied petitioner its ri1ht to due process.

#.

The principal action sub6ect of the petition for 5anda5us is

the annul5ent of the auction sale. $lternativel', petitioner

sou1ht the ri1ht to consi1n the rede5ption price, inclusive of

interests on the basis that it (as e7ercisin1 the ri1ht of

rede5ption (ithin the period provided b' la(. The ?onorable

*ourt ruled onl' on the repeal of Presidential Decree No.

;; and not the issuesK1rounds raised in the te5porar'

restrainin1 orderK(rit of preli5inar' in6unction nor on the

issues raised in the petition for 5anda5us, contrar' to la(.

*.

The ?onorable *ourt co55itted 1rave error (hen it

sustained the validit' of the actions of the *it' Treasurer (ith

respect to the auction sale of the properties sub6ect of the

petition and its unla(ful refusal to accept the rede5ption

price of the properties sub6ect of the auction sale contrar' to

the provisions of 9ue:on *it' Ordinance No. )uestion of the validit' of the notice of

the auction sale cannot be su55aril' dis5issed (ithout

hearin1 and rulin1 on the alle1ation of lac! of notice and

fraud raised b' petitioner in its petition for 5anda5us.

On Dece5ber , +==4, the RT* rendered a Decision/

1rantin1 the petition, the decretal portion of (hich readsG

C?RFOR, pre5ises considered, the aboveuent properties sold at public auction should start fro5

the date of re1istration of the certificate of sale or the final

deed of sale in favor of the purchaser, so that the delin>uent

re1istered o(ner or third parties interested in the rede5ption

5a' be notified that the delin>uent propert' had been sold,

and that the' have one ")& 'ear fro5 said constructive notice

of the sale (ithin (hich to redee5 the propert'. The RT*

(as also of the opinion that Section +), R.$. No. /)= did

not a5end Section /0 of P.D. No. ;;.

?ence, the petition raisin1 the follo(in1 ar1u5entsG

I

The re1ional trial court, branch )=), >ue:on cit', decided a

>uestion AofB la( contrar' to la( and 6urisprudence (hen it

decided that section /0 of p.d. ;; (as not repealed b'
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt8

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

7/17


!

republic act no. /)= !no(n as the local 1overn5ent code of

)).

II

The re1ional trial court, branch )=), >ue:on cit', decided a

>uestion AofB la( contrar' to la( and 6urisprudence (hen it

raised the follo(in1 issues (hich do not confor5 to the

petition and ans(er filed b' the partiesG

a. (hether or not the respondent is entitled to the protection

of all the provisions of >ue:on cit' ta7 ordinance nu5ber spue:on cit' AhBas to be rec!oned fro5 the date of

$NNOT$TION OF T? *RTIFI*$T OF sale pursuant to

para1raph /, section ); of >ue:on cit' ta7 ordinance no. spuentl',

as re1ards rede5ption of ta7 delin>uent properties sold atpublic auction, the pertinent provision is Section +) of R.$.

No. /)=, (hich providesG

Section +). Rede5ption of Propert' Sold. L Cithin one ")&

'ear fro5 the date of sale, the o(ner of the delin>uent real

propert' or person havin1 le1al interest therein, or his

representative, shall have the ri1ht to redee5 the propert'

upon pa'5ent to the local treasurer of the a5ount of

delin>uent ta7, includin1 the interest due thereon, and the

e7penses of sale fro5 the date of delin>uenc' to the date of

sale, plus interest of not 5ore than t(o percent "+& per

5onth on the purchase price fro5 the date of sale to the

date of rede5ption. Such pa'5ent shall invalidate the

certificate of sale issued to the purchaser and the o(ner of

the delin>uent real propert' or person havin1 le1al interest

therein shall be entitled to a certificate of rede5ption (hich

shall be issued b' the local treasurer or his deput'.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt11

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

8/17


"

Fro5 the date of sale until the e7piration of the period of

rede5ption, the delin>uent real propert' shall re5ain in the

possession of the o(ner or person havin1 le1al interest

therein (ho shall re5ain in the possession of the o(ner or

person havin1 le1al interest therein (ho shall be entitled to

the inco5e and other fruits thereof.

The local treasurer or his deput', upon receipt fro5 the

purchaser of the certificate of sale, shall forth(ith return to

the latter the entire a5ount paid b' hi5 plus interest of not

5ore than t(o percent "+& per 5onth. Thereafter, the

propert' shall be free fro5 all lien of such delin>uent ta7,

interest due thereon and e7penses of sale.)+

Fro5 the fore1oin1, the o(ner of the delin>uent real propert'

or person havin1 le1al interest therein, or his representative,

has the ri1ht to redee5 the propert' (ithin one ")& 'ear fro5

the date of sale upon pa'5ent of the delin>uent ta7 and

other fees. Veril', the period of rede5ption of ta7 delin>uentproperties should be counted not fro5 the date of

re1istration of the certificate of sale, as previousl' provided

b' Section /0 of P.D. No. ;;, but rather on the date of sale

of the ta7 delin>uent propert', as e7plicitl' provided b'

Section +) of R.$. No. /)=.

Nonetheless, the 1overn5ent of 9ue:on *it', pursuant to

the ta7in1 po(er vested on local 1overn5ent units b'

Section 4, $rticle of the )0/ *onstitution)3and R.$. No.

/)=, enacted *it' Ordinance No. SPuent ta7, includin1 interest due thereon, and the

e7penses of sale plus interest of t(o percent "+& per 5onth

on the purchase price fro5 the date of sale to the date of

rede5ption. Such pa'5ent shall invalidate the certificate of

sale issued to the purchaser and the o(ner of the delin>uent

real propert' or person havin1 le1al interest therein shall be

entitled to a certificate of rede5ption (hich shall be issued

b' the *it' Treasurer.

7 7 7 7

Veril', the ordinance is e7plicit that the oneuent

propert'. There is, therefore, a need to reconcile these

see5in1l' conflictin1 provisions of a 1eneral la( and a

special la(.

$ 1eneral statute is one (hich e5braces a class of sub6ects

or places and does not o5it an' sub6ect or place naturall'

belon1in1 to such class. $ special statute, as the ter5 is

1enerall' understood, is one (hich relates to particular

persons or thin1s of a class or to a particular portion or

section of the state onl'.);In the present case, R.$. No. /)=

is to be construed as a 1eneral la(, (hile *it' Ordinance No.

SPuestion.

In 1ivin1 effect to these la(s, it is also (orth' to note that in

cases involvin1 rede5ption, the la( protects the ori1inal

o(ner. It is the polic' of the la( to aid rather than to defeat

the o(nerJs ri1ht. Therefore, rede5ption should be loo!ed

upon (ith favor and (here no in6ur' (ill follo(, a liberal

construction (ill be 1iven to our rede5ption la(s, specificall'

on the e7ercise of the ri1ht to redee5.)

To har5oni:e the provisions of the t(o la(s and to 5aintainthe polic' of the la( to aid rather than to defeat the o(nerJs

ri1ht to redee5 his propert', Section ); "a&, Para1raph / of

*it' Ordinance No. SP

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

9/17


#

of the clai5s or defenses of both parties.)/ Points of la(,

theories, issues and ar1u5ents should be brou1ht to the

attention of the trial court to 1ive the opposin1 part' an

opportunit' to present further evidence 5aterial to these

5atters durin1 6udicial proceedin1s before the lo(er court.

Other(ise, it (ould be too late to raise these issues durin1

appeal. $ part' cannot, on appeal, chan1e funda5entall' the

nature of the issue in the case. Chen a part' deliberatel'

adopts a certain theor' and the case is decided upon that

theor' in the court belo(, he (ill not be per5itted to chan1e

the sa5e on appeal, because to per5it hi5 to do so (ould

be unfair to the adverse part'.)0

$s earl' as in its Me5orandu5 to Serve as Draft

Resolution,) respondent had brou1ht Section ); "a&,

Para1raph / of *it' Ordinance No. SPuent properties.

C?RFOR, pre5ises considered, the petition is DNID.

Sub6ect to the above dis>uisitions, the Decision of the RT* in

SP. *ivil $ction 9uentl' lifted

the TRO and reset the e7tra6udicial foreclosure sale on +

Ma' +==+. $t the foreclosure sale, private respondent

e5er1ed as the hi1hest bidder. $ certificate of sale)= (as
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/aug2010/gr_171033_2010.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt10

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

10/17


1$

e7ecuted on ; -une +==+ in favor of private respondent. On

/ -une +==+, the certificate of sale (as annotated as ntr'

No. )044)) on T*T No. ++= coverin1 the foreclosed

propert'.

$fter the lapse of the oneuestionin1 the validit' of the e7tra6udicial foreclosure

sale.

Private respondent, on the other hand, 5aintains that theapplication for the issuance of a (rit of possession in a

foreclosure proceedin1 is e7 parte in nature. ?ence,

petitionersJ ri1ht to due process (as not violated even if the'

(ere not 1iven a chance to file their opposition. Private

respondent ar1ues that the issuance of a (rit of possession

5a' not be sta'ed b' a pendin1 case >uestionin1 the validit'

of the e7tra6udicial foreclosure sale. It contends that the

for5er has no bearin1 on the latterE hence, there is no

violation of the rule a1ainst foru5 shoppin1. Private

respondent asserts that there is no 6udicial deter5ination

involved in the issuance of a (rit of possessionE thus, the

sa5e cannot be the sub6ect of an appeal.

$t the outset, (e 5ust point out that the authorities relied

upon b' petitioners are not in point and have no application

here. In #ustos v. *ourt of $ppeals,+=the *ourt si5pl' ruled

that the issue of possession (as intert(ined (ith the issue of

o(nership in the consolidated cases of unla(ful detainer and

accion reinvindicatoria. In Vda. De e!aspi v. "venda#o,+)

the *ourt 5erel' stated that in a case of unla(ful detainer,

ph'sical possession should not be disturbed pendin1 the

resolution of the issue of o(nership. Neither case involved

the ri1ht to possession of a purchaser at an e7tra6udicial

foreclosure of a 5ort1a1e.

#anco Filipino Savin1s and Mort1a1e #an! v. Pardo++

s>uarel' ruled on the ri1ht to possession of a purchaser at

an e7tra6udicial foreclosure of a 5ort1a1e. This case

involved a real estate 5ort1a1e as securit' for a loan

obtained fro5 a ban!. pon the 5ort1a1orJs default, the

ban! e7tra6udiciall' foreclosed the 5ort1a1e. $t the auction

sale, the ban! (as the hi1hest bidder. $ certificate of sale

(as dul' issued and re1istered. The ban! then applied for

the issuance of a (rit of possession, (hich the lo(er court

dis5issed. The *ourt reversed the lo(er court and held that

the purchaser at the auction sale (as entitled to a (rit of

possession pendin1 the lapse of the rede5ption period upona si5ple 5otion and upon the postin1 of a bond.1avvphi1

In Navarra v. *ourt of $ppeals,+3 the purchaser at an

e7tra6udicial foreclosure sale applied for a (rit of possession
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_169190_2010.html#fnt23

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

11/17


11

after the lapse of the oneuire5ents of this $ct. Such petition shall be 5ade

under oath and filed in for5 of an e7 parte 5otion 7 7 7 and

the court shall, upon approval of the bond, order that a (rit of

possession issue, addressed to the sheriff of the province in

(hich the propert' is situated, (ho shall e7ecute said order

i55ediatel'. "5phasis supplied&

In the present case, the certificate of sale of the foreclosed

propert' (as annotated on T*T No. ++= on / -une +==+.

The rede5ption period thus lapsed on / -une +==3, one

'ear fro5 the re1istration of the sale.+ Chen private

respondent applied for the issuance of a (rit of possessionon )0 $u1ust +==;, the rede5ption period had lon1 lapsed.

Since the foreclosed propert' (as not redee5ed (ithin one

'ear fro5 the re1istration of the e7tra6udicial foreclosure

sale, private respondent had ac>uired an absolute ri1ht, as

purchaser, to the (rit of possession. It had beco5e the

5inisterial dut' of the lo(er court to issue the (rit of

possession upon 5ere 5otion pursuant to Section / of $ct

No. 3)34, as a5ended.

Moreover, once o(nership has been consolidated, the

issuance of the (rit of possession beco5es a 5inisterial

dut' of the court, upon proper application and proof of title. +/

In the present case, (hen private respondent applied for the

issuance of a (rit of possession, it presented a ne( transfer

certificate of title issued in its na5e dated 0 -ul' +==3. The

ri1ht of private respondent to the possession of the propert'

(as thus founded on its ri1ht of o(nership. $s the purchaser

of the propert' at the foreclosure sale, in (hose na5e title

over the propert' (as alread' issued, the ri1ht of private

respondent over the propert' had beco5e absolute, vestin1

in it the corollar' ri1ht of possession.

Petitioners are (ron1 in insistin1 that the' (ere denied due

process of la( (hen the' (ere declared in default despite

the fact that the' had filed their opposition to the issuance ofa (rit of possession. The application for the issuance of a

(rit of possession is in the for5 of an e7 parte 5otion. It

issues as a 5atter of course once the re>uire5ents are

fulfilled. No discretion is left to the court.+0

Petitioners cannot oppose or appeal the courtJs order

1rantin1 the (rit of possession in an e7 parte proceedin1.

The re5ed' of petitioners is to have the sale set aside and

the (rit of possession cancelled in accordance (ith Section

0 of $ct No. 3)34, as a5ended, to (itG

S*. 0. The debtor 5a', in the proceedin1s in (hich

possession (as re>uested, but not later than thirt' da's after

the purchaser (as 1iven possession, petition that the sale be

set aside and the (rit of possession cancelled, specif'in1 the

da5a1es suffered b' hi5, because the 5ort1a1e (as not

violated or the sale (as not 5ade in accordance (ith the

provisions hereof. 7 7 7

$n' >uestion re1ardin1 the validit' of the e7tra6udicial

foreclosure sale and the resultin1 cancellation of the (rit

5a' be deter5ined in a subse>uent proceedin1 as outlined

in Section 0 of $ct No. 3)34, as a5ended. Such >uestion

should not be raised as a 6ustification for opposin1 theissuance of a (rit of possession since under $ct No. 3)34,

as a5ended, the proceedin1 for this is e7 parte.

Further, the ri1ht to possession of a purchaser at an

e7tra6udicial foreclosure sale is not affected b' a pendin1

case >uestionin1 the validit' of the foreclosure proceedin1.

The latter is not a bar to the for5er. ven pendin1 such latter

proceedin1, the purchaser at a foreclosure sale is entitled to

the possession of the foreclosed propert'.+

8astl', (e rule that petitionersJ clai5 of foru5 shoppin1 has

no basis. nder $ct No. 3)34, as a5ended, a (rit ofpossession is issued e7 parte as a 5atter of course upon

co5pliance (ith the re>uire5ents. It is not a 6ud15ent on the

5erits that can a5ount to res 6udicata, one of the essential

ele5ents in foru5 shoppin1.3=

The *ourt of $ppeals correctl' dis5issed the petition for

certiorari filed b' petitioners for lac! of 5erit.

C?RFOR, (e DN the petition for revie(. Ce

$FFIRM the + $pril +==4 and ; $u1ust +==4 Resolutions of

the *ourt of $ppeals in *$

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

12/17


12

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 15)659, '!"u!2 (5, (+1+

EIGIO P. MAARI, Petitioner.

vs.

GO&ERNMENT SER&ICE INSURANCE S%STEM !"# THE

PRO&INCIA SHERIFF OF PAMPANGA,Respondents.

D * I S I O N

BERSAMIN, J.:

#' petition for revie( on certiorari, the petitioner appeals the

decision pro5ul1ated on March )/, +==3, (hereb' the *ourt

of $ppeals "*$& dis5issed his petition for certiorari.

A"t**#*"ts

In )0, the petitioner obtained t(o loans totalin1

P3;,===.== fro5 respondent Hovern5ent Service Insurance

S'ste5 "HSIS&. To secure the perfor5ance of his

obli1ations, he 5ort1a1ed t(o parcels of land re1istered

under his and his (ife Marcelina MallariJs na5es. ?o(ever,he paid HSIS about ten 'ears after contractin1 the

obli1ations onl' P)=,===.== on Ma' ++, )/0 and

P+=,===.== on $u1ust )), )/0.)

Chat follo(ed thereafter (as the series of inordinate 5oves

of the petitioner to dela' the efforts of HSIS to recover on the

debt, and to have the unha5pered possession of the

foreclosed propert'.

$fter re5indin1 the petitioner of his unpaid obli1ation on Ma'

+, )/, HSIS sent on Nove5ber +, )0) a tele1raphic

de5and to hi5 to update his account. On Nove5ber )=,)0), he re>uested a final accountin1, but did not do

an'thin1 5ore. Nearl' three 'ears later, on March +), )0;,

HSIS applied for the e7tra6udicial foreclosure of the

5ort1a1e b' reason of his failure to settle his account. On

Nove5ber ++, )0;, he re>uested an updated co5putation

of his outstandin1 account. On Nove5ber +, )0;, he

persuaded the sheriff to hold the publication of the

foreclosure notice in abe'ance, to a(ait action on his

pendin1 re>uest for final accountin1 "that is, ta!in1 his

pa'5ents of P3=,===.== 5ade in )/0 into account&. On

Dece5ber )3, )0;, HSIS responded to his re>uest and

rendered a detailed e7planation of the account. On Ma' 3=,

)04, it sent another updated state5ent of account. On -ul'

+), )0, it finall' co55enced e7tra6udicial foreclosure

proceedin1s a1ainst hi5 because he had 5ean(hile 5ade

no further pa'5ents.

On $u1ust ++, )0, the petitioner sued HSIS and the

Provincial Sheriff of Pa5pan1a in the Re1ional Trial *ourt

"RT*&, #ranch ;;, in San Fernando, Pa5pan1a, doc!eted

as *ivil *ase No. /0=+,+ ostensibl' to en6oin the5 fro5

proceedin1 a1ainst hi5 for in6unction "(ith an application for

preli5inar' in6unction&. The RT* ulti5atel' decided *ivil

*ase No. /0=+ in his favor, nullif'in1 the e7tra6udicial

foreclosure and auction saleE cancellin1 Transfer *ertificate

of Title "T*T& No. +0;+/+uest for an e7tension of ti5e (ithin

(hich to vacate the properties. It is noted that HSIS acceded

to the re>uest.))1avvphi1

et, the petitioner did not voluntaril' vacate the properties,

but instead filed a 5otion for reconsideration andKor to >uash

the (rit of e7ecution on March +/, +===.)+$lso, the petitionerco55enced a second case a1ainst HSIS and the provincial

sheriff in the RT* in San Fernando, Pa5pan1a "*ivil *ase

No. )+=43&, ostensibl' for consi1nation "coupled (ith a

pra'er for a (rit of preli5inar' in6unction or te5porar'

restrainin1 order&. ?o(ever, the RT* dis5issed *ivil *ase

No. )+=43 on Nove5ber )=, +=== on the 1round of res

$udicata, i5pellin1 hi5 to appeal the dis5issal to the *$

"*.$.

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

13/17


13

to the properties durin1 the pendenc' of his motion for

reconsideration and%or to &uash the writ of execution.)

To prevent the Presidin1 -ud1e of #ranch ;; of the RT*

fro5 resolvin1 the pendin1 incidents in *ivil *ase No. /0=+,

HSIS 5oved to inhibit hi5 for alle1ed partialit' to(ards the

petitioner as borne out b' his failure to act on the motion for

reconsideration and%or to &uash writ of execution, motions

for contempt of court, andmotion forissuance of brea' open

orderfor 5ore than a 'ear fro5 their filin1, pra'in1 that the

case be reuentl', *ivil *ase No. /0=+ (as re

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

14/17


14

;. T? ORDR OF T? TRI$8 *ORT D$TD F#R$R

)), +==+, DNINH T? MOTION FOR

R*ONSIDR$TION OF T? ORDR D$TD

SPTM#R );, +==), IN R8$TION TO T? *ORT

ORDR D$TD -8 3=, +==).+;

Ru4"g o t* Cout

The petition for revie( on certiorari absolutel' lac!s 5erit.

I

Petition for *ertiorari in *$

Cas Filed #e'ond Re1le5entar' Period

The petition assailed before the *$ on certiorari the follo(in1

orders of the RT*, to (itG

). The order dated October 0, ) "1rantin1 the e7 parte

5otion for e7ecution andKor issuance of the (rit of e7ecution

cu5 (rit of possession of HSIS&E+4

+. The order dated October +), ) "directin1 the issuance

of the (rit of e7ecution cu5 (rit of possession in favor of

HSIS&E+

3. The order dated -ul' 3=, +==) "re>uirin1 the #ranch *ler!

of *ourt to cause the reuires a petition for certiorari to be filed

@not later than si7t' "=& da's fro5 notice of the 6ud15ent,

order or resolution,@ or, in case a 5otion for reconsideration

or ne( trial is ti5el' filed, (hether such 5otion is re>uired or

not, @the si7t' "=& da' period shall be counted fro5 notice of

the denial of the said 5otion.@

It is (orth e5phasi:in1 that the =

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

15/17


15

(ithin t(elve 5onths after the saleE@ and althou1h the

Revised Rules of *ourt "effective on -anuar' ), );&

continued to provide in Section 3= of Rule 3 that the

rede5ption be 5ade fro5 the purchaser @at an' ti5e (ithin

t(elve ")+& 5onths after the sale,@34 the )+uired under

Section / of $ct No. 3)34, as a5ended, considerin1 that the

possession of the land beco5es his absolute ri1ht as thelandJs confir5ed o(ner.;=The consolidation of o(nership in

the purchaserJs na5e and the issuance to hi5 of a ne( T*T

then entitles hi5 to de5and possession of the propert' at

an' ti5e, and the issuance of a (rit of possession to hi5

beco5es a 5atter of ri1ht upon the consolidation of title in

his na5e.

The court can neither halt nor hesitate to issue the (rit of

possession. It cannot e7ercise an' discretion to deter5ine

(hether or not to issue the (rit, for the issuance of the (rit to

the purchaser in an e7tra6udicial foreclosure sale beco5es a

5inisterial function.

;)

Veril', a 5ar!ed distinction e7istsbet(een a discretionar' act and a 5inisterial one. $ purel'

5inisterial act or dut' is one that an officer or tribunal

perfor5s in a 1iven state of facts, in a prescribed 5anner, in

obedience to the 5andate of a le1al authorit', (ithout re1ard

to or the e7ercise of his o(n 6ud15ent upon the propriet' or

i5propriet' of the act done. If the la( i5poses a dut' upon a

public officer and 1ives hi5 the ri1ht to decide ho( or (hen

the dut' shall be perfor5ed, such dut' is discretionar', not

5inisterial. The dut' is 5inisterial onl' (hen its dischar1e

re>uires neither the e7ercise of official discretion nor the

e7ercise of 6ud15ent.;+

The proceedin1 upon an application for a (rit of possession

is e7 parte and su55ar' in nature, brou1ht for the benefit of

one part' onl' and (ithout notice bein1 sent b' the court to

an' person adverse in interest. The relief is 1ranted even

(ithout 1ivin1 an opportunit' to be heard to the person

a1ainst (ho5 the relief is sou1ht.;3Its nature as an e7 parte

petition under $ct No. 3)34, as a5ended, renders the

application for the issuance of a (rit of possession a nonuirin1 the respondent to sho(

cause (h' he should not be punished for conte5pt.

In all other cases, char1es for indirect conte5pt shall be

co55enced b' a verified petition (ith supportin1 particulars

and certified true copies of docu5ents or papers involved

therein, and upon full co5pliance (ith the re>uire5ents for

filin1 initiator' pleadin1s for civil actions in the court

concerned. If the conte5pt char1es arose out of or are

related to a principal action pendin1 in the court, the petition

for conte5pt shall alle1e that fact but said petition shall be

doc!eted, heard and decided separatel', unless the court in

its discretion orders the consolidation of the conte5pt char1e

and the principal action for 6oint hearin1 and decision. "n&

"5phasis supplied&.

Indeed, a person 5a' be char1ed (ith indirect conte5pt onl'

b' either of t(o alternative (a's, na5el'G ")& b' a verified

petition, if initiated b' a part'E or "+& b' an order or an' other

for5al char1e re>uirin1 the respondent to sho( cause (h'

he should not be punished for conte5pt, if 5ade b' a court

a1ainst (hich the conte5pt is co55itted. In short, a char1e

of indirect conte5pt 5ust be initiated throu1h a verified

petition, unless the char1e is directl' 5ade b' the court

a1ainst (hich the conte5ptuous act is co55itted.

-ustice Re1alado has e7plained (h' the re>uire5ent of the

filin1 of a verified petition for conte5pt is 5andator'G;4

). This ne( provision clarifies (ith a re1ulator' nor5 the

proper procedure for co55encin1 conte5pt proceedin1s.

Chile such proceedin1 has been classified as a special civil

action under the for5er Rules, the hetero1eneous practice,

tolerated b' the courts, has been for an' part' to file a 5ere

5otion (ithout pa'in1 an' doc!et or la(ful fees therefor and

(ithout co5pl'in1 (ith the re>uire5ents for initiator'

pleadin1s, (hich is no( re>uired in the second para1raph of

this a5ended section. Corse, and as a conse>uence of

unre1ulated 5otions for conte5pt, said incidents so5eti5es

re5ain pendin1 for resolution althou1h the 5ain case has

alread' been decided. There are other undesirable aspects

but, at an' rate, the sa5e 5a' no( be eli5inated b' this

a5endator' procedure.

?enceforth, e7cept for indirect conte5pt proceedin1s

initiated motu proprio b' order of or a for5al char1e b' the

offended court, all char1es shall be co55enced b' a verified

petition (ith full co5pliance (ith the re>uire5ents therefor

and shall be disposed of in accordance (ith the second

para1raph of this section. "5phasis supplied&.

*learl', the petitionerJs char1in1 HSIS, et al. (ith indirect

conte5pt b' 5ere 5otions (as not per5itted b' the Rules of

*ourt.

$nd, secondl', even assu5in1 that char1es for conte5pt

could be initiated b' 5otion, the petitioner should have

tendered filin1 fees. The need to tender filin1 fees derived

fro5 the fact that the procedure for indirect conte5pt under

Rule /), Rules of *ourt (as an independent special civil

action. et, the petitioner did not tender and pa' filin1 fees,

resultin1 in the trial court not ac>uirin1 6urisdiction over theaction. Trul', the o5ission to tender filin1 fees (ould have

also (arranted the dis5issal of the char1es.

It see5s to be indubitable fro5 the fore1oin1 that the

petitioner initiated the char1es for indirect conte5pt (ithout

re1ard to the re>uisites of the Rules of *ourt si5pl' to ve7

the adverse part'. ?e thereb' disrespected the orderl'

ad5inistration of 6ustice and co55itted, 'et a1ain, an abuse

of procedures.

IV

Petitioner Cas Huilt' of

Misconduct $s $ 8a('er

The *$ dee5ed it unavoidable to observe that the petition

for certiorari brou1ht b' the petitioner to the *$ (as @part of

the dilator' tactics of the petitioner to stall the e7ecution of a

final and e7ecutor' decision in *ivil *ase No. /0=+ (hich

has alread' been resolved (ith finalit' b' no less than the

hi1hest tribunal of the land.@;

The observation of the *$ deserves our concurrence.

Veril', the petitioner (ittin1l' adopted his aforedescribed

(orthless and ve7atious le1al 5aneuvers for no other

purpose e7cept to dela' the full enforce5ent of the (rit of

possession, despite !no(in1, bein1 hi5self a la('er, that as

a non

7/24/2019 Cred Trans 9.1

17/17


1!

the e7tra6udicial foreclosure and the e7 parte issuance of the

(rit of e7ecution cu5 (rit of possessionE and that the

enforce5ent of the dul'uic! ad5inistration of 6ustice in favor of

5ort1a1ee and purchaser HSIS.

?is conduct contravened Rule )=.=3, *anon )= of the *ode

of Professional Responsibilit', b' (hich he (as en6oined as

a la('er to @observe the rules of procedure and 777 not AtoB

5isuse the5 to defeat the ends of 6ustice.@ #' his dilator'

5oves, he further breached and dishonored his 8a('erJs

Oath, particularl'G;/

777 I (ill not (ittin1l' or (illin1l' pro5ote or sue an'

1roundless, false or unla(ful suit, nor 1ive aid nor consent to

the sa5eE I (ill dela' no 5an for 5one' or 5alice, and (ill

conduct 5'self as a la('er accordin1 to the best of 5'!no(led1e and discretion (ith all 1ood fidelit' as (ell to the

courts as to 5' clients 777

Ce stress that the petitionerJs bein1 the part' liti1ant hi5self

did not 1ive hi5 the license to resort to dilator' 5oves. ?is

:eal to defend (hatever ri1hts he then believed he had and

to pro5ote his perceived re5ainin1 interests in the propert'

alread' la(full' transferred to HSIS should not e7ceed the

bounds of the la(, for he re5ained at all ti5es an officer of

the *ourt burdened to conduct hi5self @(ith all 1ood fidelit'

as (ell to the courts as to AhisB clients.@;0?is true obli1ation

as a la('er should not be (arped b' an' 5isplaced sense of

his ri1hts and interests as a liti1ant, because he (as, above

all, bound not to undul' dela' a case, not to i5pede the

e7ecution of a 6ud15ent, and not to 5isuse *ourt

processes.;*onse>uentl', he 5ust be 5ade to account for

his 5isconduct as a la('er.

C?RFOR, (e den' the petition for revie( on certiorari

for lac! of 5erit, and affir5 the decision of the *ourt of

$ppeals pro5ul1ated on March )/, +==3, (ith the costs of

suit to be paid b' the petitioner.

The *o55ittee on #ar Discipline of the Inte1rated #ar of the

Philippines is directed to investi1ate the petitioner for (hat

appear to be "a& his deliberate disre1ard of the Rules of

*ourt and 6urisprudence pertinent to the issuance andi5ple5entation of the (rit of possession under $ct No. 3)34,

as a5endedE and "b& his (ittin1 violations of the 8a('erJs

Oath and the *ode of Professional Responsibilit'.

SO ORDRD.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt47http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt47http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt48http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt48http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt49http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt49http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt47http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt48http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jan2010/gr_157659_2010.html#fnt49

Cred Trans 9.1

Documents

Transcript of Cred Trans 9.1