Case Digest (G.R. No. 158090)
Facts:
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) v. Heirs of Fernando F. Caballero, G.R. No. 158090, October 04, 2010, the Supreme Court Second Division, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.The real property at issue was Lot No. 3355 (TCT No. T-16035) in Mlang, Cotabato, then owned by Fernando F. Caballero (Fernando), who in 1968 obtained a P20,000 loan from GSIS, executing a real estate mortgage on the lot. After Fernando defaulted, the mortgage was foreclosed (January 20, 1973) and the foreclosed property was sold at public auction on March 26, 1973, where GSIS was the sole bidder (P36,283). GSIS executed an Affidavit of Consolidation of Ownership on September 5, 1975, and caused issuance of a new title (TCT No. T-45874) in its name.
GSIS informed Fernando of consolidation on November 26, 1975 and sought rent for his continued occupancy; Fernando sought to repurchase by installment but negotiations failed. GSIS scheduled a public bidding on January 16, 1989. On the bidding date Fernando’s daughter and attorney-in-fact, Jocelyn G. Caballero, bid P350,000 while Carmelita Mercantile Trading Corporation (CMTC) bid P450,000 and was declared highest bidder. The GSIS Board confirmed the award by Resolution No. 199 (May 16, 1989) and GSIS executed a Deed of Absolute Sale to CMTC (July 27, 1989); TCT No. T-76183 was thereafter issued in CMTC’s name.
Fernando (through Jocelyn) sued in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Kabacan, Cotabato, against CMTC, GSIS and its officers, and the Register of Deeds, seeking annulment of the bid award, the deed, and TCT No. 76183; declaration that Fernando’s P350,000 bid was the winning bid; issuance of a deed in his favor; and damages. GSIS answered and filed a counterclaim seeking recovery of rentals: (a) P130,365.81 representing back rentals and interest; and (b) P249,800 representing rentals Fernando allegedly collected from CMTC/Carmelita Ang Hao from January 1973 to February 1988.
After trial the RTC rendered judgment (September 27, 1994) dismissing Fernando’s complaint and granting GSIS’s counterclaim directing Fernando to pay P249,800. The RTC denied Fernando’s motion for reconsideration (March 27, 1995). On appeal the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC decision but modified it by deleting the award of P249,800 in favor of GSIS (Decision, December 17, 2002); the CA denied GSIS’s motion for reconsideration (Resolution, April 29, 2003).
GSIS filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, challenging the CA’s deletion of the P249,800 award. The surviving heirs of Fernando sought substitution after his death (February 12, 2002). Respondents attempted to relitigate aspects earlier presented in G.R. No. 156609, which this Court had denied by Resolution dated April 23, 2003 (final June 9, 2003); the Court noted that those arguments were barred by that prior denial.
GSIS raised two assi...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was GSIS’s counterclaim for recovery of rentals in the amount of P249,800 a compulsory counterclaim or a permissive counterclaim, and did the RTC acquire jurisdiction over it despite GSIS’s failure to pay docket fees?
- If the counterclaim was permissive, did the CA err in finding GSIS’s documentary evidence in...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)