G.R. No. 167998 - LZK Holdings and Development Corp. vs. Planters Development Bank

Petitioner LZK Holdings and Development Corporation secured a loan of P40,000,000 from respondent Planters Development Bank.
The loan was evidenced by a mortgage on a parcel of land in Catbangen, San Fernando City, La Union, identifiable by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-45337.

Upon LZK’s failure to pay the loan, Planters Bank commenced extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings.
At the foreclosure auction held on September 21, 1998, Planters Bank emerged as the highest bidder.
The foreclosure sale was subsequently registered on March 16, 1999.

LZK filed a complaint for annulment of the extrajudicial foreclosure sale, mortgage contract, promissory notes, and damages in Civil Case No. 6215 with the RTC of San Fernando City, La Union, Branch 29; however, the complaint was dismissed on June 23, 1998 for improper venue.
Planters Bank pursued an ex parte petition for the issuance of a writ of possession, filing this with the RTC of San Fernando City, La Union, Branch 66 on December 27, 1999.
Concurrently, LZK initiated another complaint (Civil Case No. 99-741) for annulment of foreclosure-related documents and filed an urgent motion for a writ of preliminary injunction, this time before the RTC of Makati City, Branch 150.

Three days before the expiration of the one-year redemption period, the Makati RTC issued a temporary restraining order on March 13, 2000, enjoining Planters Bank from consolidating title over the foreclosed property.
On April 3, 2000, the Makati RTC ordered the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction—subject to LZK posting a bond of P40,000,000—which resulted in the suspension of title consolidation when LZK failed to post the required bond.

Planters Bank filed a petition for certiorari (CA-G.R. SP No. 59327) with the Court of Appeals, which later affirmed the Makati RTC’s injunction order.
A subsequent petition for review (G.R. No. 164536) by Planters Bank before the Supreme Court was denied for failure to establish reversible error, rendering the CA decision final and executory as of January 19, 2005.
On May 11, 2000, the RTC of San Fernando City held in abeyance the resolution of the ex parte petition for the writ of possession in light of the pending injunction order.

Planters Bank’s motion for reconsideration was denied in an order dated September 1, 2000.
The Court of Appeals later annulled and set aside orders of the San Fernando RTC, affirming that the writ of possession is a ministerial duty, which should issue upon proper filing and bond approval, irrespective of pending injunctions affecting title consolidation.

Whether petitioner’s challenge that the Court of Appeals misapplied the doctrine of non-interference by disregarding the writ of preliminary injunction issued by the Makati RTC is valid.
Whether respondent Planters Bank is entitled to possession of the foreclosed property despite:

The existence of pending annulment actions regarding the extrajudicial foreclosure, mortgage contract, and promissory notes;
A subsequent temporary restraining order and a writ of preliminary injunction that enjoined consolidation of title.

Whether the ministerial duty of the trial court to issue a writ of possession under Section 7 of Act No. 3135 is affected by the pending litigation on annulment of foreclosure and related matters.
Whether the filing of multiple petitions before the Court of Appeals constitutes forum shopping, and if so, whether it affects respondent’s right to obtain a writ of possession.