Title
Philippine National Bank vs. Dee
Case
G.R. No. 182128
Decision Date
Feb 19, 2014
Dee fully paid for a lot, but PNB refused to release the title due to a mortgage. Courts ruled in Dee's favor, citing social justice and PNB's awareness of prior sale agreements.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 182128)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Contract of Sale and Mortgage
    • In July 1994, Teresita Tan Dee purchased on installment Lot 12, Block 21-A (204 sqm), TCT No. 619608, from Antipolo Properties, Inc. (now Prime East Properties, Inc. or PEPI).
    • In August 1996, PEPI assigned a 213,093-sqm tract (including Dee’s lot) to AFP-RSBS, Inc.
    • On September 10, 1996, PEPI obtained a ₱205 million loan from Philippine National Bank (PNB), mortgaging multiple properties including Dee’s lot; HLURB clearance was issued on September 18, 1996.
  • Completion of Sale and Administrative Proceedings
    • After full payment, PEPI and AFP-RSBS executed a deed of sale in favor of Dee in July 1998. Dee demanded the owner’s duplicate title from PNB but was refused.
    • Dee filed with HLURB on April 24, 2002 a complaint for specific performance. On May 21, 2003, HLURB ordered PNB to release the mortgage and surrender TCT No. 619608 to Dee, and PEPI/AFP-RSBS to deliver a clean title or pay damages.
    • HLURB’s Board of Commissioners affirmed on March 15, 2004 (modifying interest). The Office of the President (OP) affirmed on August 4, 2004 (modifying monetary awards).
  • Judicial Appeals
    • PNB petitioned the Court of Appeals (CA); on August 13, 2007, the CA denied the petition and affirmed the OP decision.
    • CA denied PNB’s motion for reconsideration on March 13, 2008. PNB filed this Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court.

Issues:

  • Mortgage versus Buyer’s Rights
    • Does PNB’s duly registered and HLURB-approved mortgage over TCT No. 619608 bar the outright release of the title to Dee?
    • Can the mortgage be cancelled or released in favor of Dee absent redemption by PEPI/AFP-RSBS under Section 25, PD 957, or direct payment by Dee to PNB?
  • Privity and Stipulation Pour Autrui
    • Is PNB bound by undertakings in the Affidavit of Undertaking between PEPI/AFP-RSBS and Dee, or does privity of contract preclude such obligation?
    • Does paragraph 6 of the Affidavit constitute a stipulation pour autrui creating obligations in favor of Dee?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.