Case Digest (G.R. No. 196950)
Facts:
The case involves Helen E. Cabling, assisted by her husband Ariel Cabling, as the petitioner, and Joselin Tan Lumapas, represented by Nory Abellanes, as the respondent. The events leading to the case began with an extrajudicial foreclosure sale conducted on December 21, 2007, over a 216-square meter property located in the Barrio of Sta. Rita, Olongapo City, which was covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-14852. Helen Cabling emerged as the highest bidder in this sale. Following the sale, a Final Deed of Sale was issued by the Sheriff of Olongapo City on February 14, 2009, and the title was transferred to the petitioner, with TCT No. T-14853 issued on March 23, 2009. On May 6, 2009, the petitioner filed an application for the issuance of a Writ of Possession with the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The RTC granted this application on May 19, 2009, subsequently issuing a Writ of Possession and a Notice to Vacate on May 20 and May 25, 2009, respectively.
However, ...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 196950)
Facts:
Background of the Case
- The petitioner, Helen E. Cabling, was the highest bidder in an extrajudicial foreclosure sale conducted on December 21, 2007, over a 216-square meter property in Olongapo City covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-14852. The Final Deed of Sale was issued on February 14, 2009, and the title was transferred to the petitioner on March 23, 2009, under TCT No. T-14853.
Application for Writ of Possession
- On May 6, 2009, the petitioner filed an application for the issuance of a writ of possession with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Olongapo City. The RTC granted the application on May 19, 2009, and issued a Writ of Possession and Notice to Vacate on May 20, 2009, and May 25, 2009, respectively.
Respondent's Intervention
- On May 29, 2009, the respondent, Joselin Tan Lumapas, filed a Motion for Leave of Court for Intervention as Party Defendant, along with an Urgent Motion to Hold in Abeyance the Implementation of the Writ of Possession. She claimed that the property had been sold to her by Aida Ibabao, the registered owner and judgment debtor/mortgagor, under a Deed of Conditional Sale. The RTC initially held the implementation of the writ in abeyance but later denied the respondent's motion for intervention on June 2, 2009.
RTC's Orders
- On July 14, 2009, the RTC granted the respondent's motion for reconsideration, recalling the writ of possession issued to the petitioner. The RTC ruled that an ex-parte writ of possession cannot be enforced against a third party in actual possession of the property who is not in privity with the debtor/mortgagor. The petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied on September 10, 2009.
CA Ruling
- The petitioner filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus with the Court of Appeals (CA), which dismissed the petition on May 12, 2011. The CA affirmed the RTC's orders, stating that the issuance of a writ of possession ceases to be ministerial when a third party in possession claims a right adverse to the debtor/mortgagor.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- (Unlock)
Ratio:
- Ministerial Issuance of Writ of Possession: Under Act No. 3135, the issuance of a writ of possession is ministerial after a foreclosure sale and during the redemption period. It also issues as a matter of course after the lapse of the redemption period and the consolidation of ownership.
- Exception to the Rule: The exception applies when a third party holds the property by adverse title or right, such as a co-owner, tenant, or usufructuary, who possesses the property in their own right and not merely as a successor or transferee of the debtor/mortgagor.
- Conditional Sale Does Not Transfer Ownership: A conditional sale does not transfer ownership until the fulfillment of the suspensive condition, typically the full payment of the purchase price. The respondent's possession, based on a conditional sale, did not constitute adverse possession, as she did not hold the property by a right independent of or superior to the debtor/mortgagor.
- General Rule Applies: Since the respondent's possession was not adverse, the general rule on the ministerial issuance of a writ of possession applied, and the petitioner was entitled to the writ.
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court ordered the RTC to issue a Writ of Possession in favor of the petitioner, Helen E. Cabling.