Title
Bustamante vs. Spouses Rosel
Case
G.R. No. 126800
Decision Date
Nov 29, 1999
A borrower tendered loan payment on maturity, refused by lender insisting on collateral sale. SC ruled stipulation invalid as pactum commissorium, favoring borrower.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 174660)

Facts:

  • Loan agreement and collateral
    • On March 8, 1987, Norma A. Rosel (borrower) and Natalia P. Bustamante with her late husband Ismael C. Bustamante (lenders) executed a loan agreement in Quezon City.
    • Terms: principal of ₱100,000; 18% annual interest; two‐year maturity (from March 1, 1987 to March 1, 1989); collateral was a 70 m² portion of TCT No. 80667 with an embedded apartment. If borrowers failed to pay, lenders had the option to purchase that collateral for ₱200,000 (inclusive of principal and interest).
  • Default, tender and consignation
    • On March 1, 1989 (maturity), respondents offered to buy the collateral at ₱200,000; petitioner refused, tendered full payment, and proposed an alternative lot as down payment. Respondents rejected both.
    • On March 5, 1990, petitioner filed a petition for consignation and deposited ₱153,000 with the Quezon City Treasurer. Respondents then consigned an additional ₱47,500 with the RTC representing unpaid interest.
  • Judicial proceedings
    • On February 28, 1990, respondents sued for specific performance with consignation before RTC, Quezon City (Branch 84).
    • RTC decision (Nov. 10, 1992): denied execution of deed of sale; ordered payment of ₱100,000 plus 18% interest from March 2, 1989 to August 10, 1990; awarded ₱5,000 attorney’s fees.
    • Court of Appeals (CA) decision (July 8, 1996): reversed RTC; ordered petitioner to execute sale deed over the 70 m² collateral upon respondents’ acceptance of ₱47,000 deposit and return to petitioner of her ₱153,000 deposit.
    • Supreme Court proceedings: initial denial of petition (Feb. 9, 1998); petitioner’s motion for reconsideration; opposition by respondents; granted motion (April 21, 1998); final resolution (Nov. 29, 1999) granting the petition, reversing CA, and dismissing respondents’ complaint.

Issues:

  • Whether petitioner failed to pay the loan at its March 1, 1989 maturity date.
  • Whether the stipulation granting respondents an option to purchase the collateral at a fixed price of ₱200,000 constitutes a valid and enforceable agreement or an unlawful pactum commissorium.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.