Title
Calimbas vs. Paguio
Case
G.R. No. 22197
Decision Date
Dec 2, 1924
Foreclosure dispute over a P5,964 debt secured by a mortgage; court upheld plaintiff's capacity, debt validity, and equitable mortgage, reversing cancellation of annotation.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 22197)

Facts:

  1. Parties Involved:

    • Plaintiff and Appellant: Gil Calimbas, as administrator of the property of the deceased Anselma V. Angeles.
    • Defendant and Appellant: Severina Paguio.
  2. Nature of the Case:

    • This is a foreclosure proceeding involving a mortgage on a property.
  3. Allegations in the Complaint:

    • The plaintiff, as administrator of Anselma V. Angeles' estate, claimed that the defendant owed the deceased P5,964, with an annual interest of P369, as evidenced by a document executed on January 2, 1910.
    • The interest from January 2, 1914, to January 2, 1923, amounting to P3,564, remained unpaid.
    • The debt was secured by a mortgage on Lot No. 905 of the cadaster of Pilar, Bataan, registered under Certificate of Title No. 1044.
    • The original mortgage document was allegedly in the defendant's possession, and no copy was found in official records.
  4. Defendant's Defense:

    • The defendant denied the allegations, pleaded the statute of limitations, and claimed the mortgage annotation was obtained through fraud.
    • She also filed a counterclaim for P2,000 in damages for the malicious filing of the case.
  5. Trial Court Decision:

    • The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff for P9,132 with 6% annual interest but ordered the cancellation of the mortgage annotation, citing improper execution of the mortgage document.
  6. Assignments of Error by Defendant:

    • The defendant raised nine errors, including the court's failure to sustain the demurrer, improper admission of evidence, and failure to apply the statute of limitations.
  7. Assignments of Error by Plaintiff:

    • The plaintiff argued that the court erred in not recognizing the debt as a mortgage debt and in ordering the cancellation of the mortgage annotation.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Legal Capacity:

    • An administrator has the authority to bring actions on behalf of the estate without special court orders under Section 702 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
  2. Equitable Mortgage:

    • A private document providing for the delivery of possession upon default can be construed as an equitable mortgage, even if not in proper mortgage form.
  3. Res Judicata:

    • The mortgage's validity was already determined in a prior cadastral case, making the issue res judicata and not subject to reopening.
  4. Statute of Limitations:

    • A written acknowledgment of the debt restarts the limitation period under Section 50 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
  5. Mortgage Annotation:

    • The court upheld the mortgage annotation, emphasizing that the final decree in the cadastral case could not be disregarded.


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.