Title
BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc. vs. Vda. de Coscolluela
Case
G.R. No. 167724
Decision Date
Jun 27, 2006
A bank cannot simultaneously pursue foreclosure and collection actions for a loan.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 167724)

Facts:

  • The case involves BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc. (petitioner) and Margarita Vda. de Coscolluela (respondent).
  • Margarita and her late husband, Oscar Coscolluela, secured an agricultural sugar crop loan from Far East Bank & Trust Co. (FEBTC) for the crop years 1997 and 1998, totaling P13,592,492.00.
  • They executed 67 promissory notes between August 29, 1996, and January 23, 1998.
  • A real estate mortgage was executed on June 13, 1997, over a parcel of land in Bacolod City, securing loans for P7,000,000.00.
  • The mortgage agreement allowed FEBTC to foreclose the property extrajudicially upon default.
  • After Oscar's death, FEBTC sent a final demand letter to Margarita on March 10, 1999, for P19,482,168.31, which included principal, past due interests, and penalties.
  • FEBTC initiated extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings on June 10, 1999, for P4,687,006.68 based on the first 33 promissory notes.
  • Concurrently, FEBTC filed a complaint in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City against Margarita for P12,672,000.31 under the remaining promissory notes.
  • Margarita raised the defense of litis pendentia, claiming the complaint was barred due to the pending extrajudicial foreclosure.
  • The RTC denied her demurrer to evidence, leading her to file a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA).
  • The CA ruled in her favor, stating that foreclosure and collection were alternative remedies, not cumulative.
  • The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied, prompting the current petition for review.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court ruled that the petition for certiorari was a proper remedy as the RTC's order denying the demurrer to evidence was tainted with grave abuse of discretion.
  • The Court upheld the CA's decision, affirming that the ...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • Generally, an order denying a motion to dismiss or a demurrer to evidence is interlocutory and not appealable; however, if it is tainted with grave abuse of discretion, it can be challenged through a petition for certiorari.
  • The remedies of foreclosure and collection are alternative, meaning a creditor cannot pursue both simultaneously for the same cause of action.
  • Since the petitioner opt...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.