G.R. No. L-20571 - Yturralde vs. Vagilidad

On March 9, 1920, Elias Aboitiz executed a chattel mortgage on a Nash automobile (Factory No. 143643) in favor of Bachrach Motor Company, Inc.
The mortgage was executed to secure a debt amounting to P3,675, payable in twelve installments under the provisions of the Chattel Mortgage Law (Act No. 1508).

In November 1920, the mortgagor defaulted in paying the required installment for that month.
As a result of the default, the Motor Company resolved to foreclose the mortgage by selling the mortgaged automobile, as permitted by Section 14 of the Chattel Mortgage Law.

The Motor Company requested Ricardo Summers, the sheriff of Manila, to seize the automobile from the mortgagor and expose it to public sale pursuant to the statute.
When the sheriff applied to the mortgagor for delivery of the car, the mortgagor refused to surrender possession.
The Motor Company initially filed an action of replevin to recover the car, but the mortgagor’s temporary resistance was maintained when Aboitiz posted a bond to retain possession pendente lite.

Subsequently, the Motor Company filed a petition in the Court for a writ of mandamus, aiming to compel the sheriff to seize the automobile and sell it in accordance with the statutory procedure.
The sheriff demurred to the petition, arguing that his duty was governed by the statute and that the seizure of property was not an automatic process, especially when possession is actively contested.

Whether, after the mortgagor’s default, the sheriff is unconditionally obligated to seize the mortgaged property at the creditor’s instance and sell it to satisfy the secured debt.
Whether the creditor, under the current statutory framework, can invoke a writ of mandamus to compel the sheriff to perform the seizure when the mortgagor refuses to yield possession.
The legal interpretation of the term “conditional sale” in the context of a chattel mortgage and its effect on the mortgagee’s right to possession.
The appropriate judicial remedy for the mortgagee when the mortgagor disputes the fact of default and resists relinquishing possession to effect a foreclosure.