G.R. No. 188944 - Spouses Berot vs. Siapno

On May 23, 2002, Macaria Berot and spouses Rodolfo A. Berot and Lilia P. Berot obtained a loan of ₱250,000.00 from Felipe C. Siapno, payable within one year with 2% monthly interest.
As security, they mortgaged 147 square meters of a 718-square-meter parcel in Banaoang, Calasiao, Pangasinan (Tax Declaration No. 1123 in the names of Macaria and her late husband Pedro Berot).

Macaria died on June 23, 2003.
On July 15, 2004, respondent filed a foreclosure of mortgage and damages action in RTC, Dagupan City, Branch 42, alleging default on the loan and interest.

Petitioners answered, raising: lack of jurisdiction over Macaria (dead at filing), invalid mortgage over the family home without children’s consent, joint (not solidary) liability, and violation in awarding attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and exemplary damages.
With leave of court, respondent amended the complaint to substitute “Estate of Macaria Berot” represented by Rodolfo A. Berot.
On June 30, 2006, the RTC rendered judgment allowing foreclosure, ordering payment of ₱250,000.00 plus 2% monthly interest from February 2004, 30% attorney’s fees, ₱20,000.00 litigation expenses, and ₱10,000.00 exemplary damages; sale to proceed upon non-payment within 90 days.
Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied on September 8, 2006.

CA Decision (Jan. 29, 2009) affirmed the RTC Decision but deleted awards of attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and exemplary damages.
CA held that substitution of the estate, though technically improper (estate has no legal personality), was waived by petitioners’ failure to object; foreclosure procedure under Rule 86, Sec. 7 was correct; and no necessity to rule on joint vs. solidary obligation.
Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied by CA Resolution on July 9, 2009.

Whether the intestate estate of Macaria Berot, a non-legal entity, could be properly impleaded and whether petitioners waived any objection.
Whether formal substitution of heirs was required despite voluntary participation of heir-representative.

Whether the loan obligation of petitioners is joint by operation of law or solidary as claimed by respondent.