Case Digest (G.R. No. 203949)
Facts:
Spouses George A. Gallent, Sr. and Mercedes M. Gallent v. Juan G. Velasquez, G.R. Nos. 203949 and 205071, April 06, 2016, the Supreme Court Third Division, Reyes, J., writing for the Court.
The dispute concerns a 761-square-meter residential lot in Alabang Hills, Muntinlupa City, originally titled in the name of George A. Gallent, Sr. In December 1996 the Spouses Gallent mortgaged the property to Allied Banking Corporation as security for a P1.5 million loan; after default Allied Bank conducted an extrajudicial foreclosure, was the highest bidder at the public auction, obtained a certificate of sale dated September 25, 2000, and—after the one-year redemption period lapsed—consolidated title in its name (TCT No. 8460).
In June 2003 Allied Bank executed an Agreement to Sell back to the Spouses Gallent for P4 million; the Gallents paid P3.5 million down and were permitted to remain in possession as tenants/lessees, the balance payable in monthly installments. Citing financial difficulty, the Gallents enlisted the help of family friend Juan Velasquez, executed a Deed of Assignment of Rights on October 24, 2003, and Velasquez paid the remaining P216,635.97. Allied Bank and Velasquez executed a Deed of Absolute Sale (November 5, 2003) and a registrable deed dated November 19, 2003; title was transferred to Velasquez (TCT No. 11814 issued November 28, 2003).
Velasquez demanded possession in June 2008; when the Spouses Gallent refused to vacate he filed an ex parte petition for issuance of a writ of possession in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Muntinlupa (LRC Case No. 09‑055) on July 6, 2009. The Spouses Gallent opposed and sought to intervene and to dismiss; the RTC denied the motions, treated the Gallents as oppositors, and—after denying reconsideration—granted Velasquez’s petition and ordered issuance of a writ of possession in July 2010. The Gallents subsequently filed Civil Case No. 10‑102 in the RTC seeking reformation of instruments, annulment of TCT No. 11814, and other reliefs, alleging the transaction with Velasquez was in truth an equitable mortgage and that the deed to Velasquez may be forged.
Two separate petitions for certiorari to the Court of Appeals (CA) produced conflicting rulings. In CA‑G.R. SP No. 116097 (10th Division) the CA held that Velasquez, as transferee of the mortgagee‑purchaser, could petition ex parte for a writ of possession because he stepped into Allied Bank’s shoes. In CA‑G.R. SP No. 114527 (Special 4th Division) the CA, relying on Mendoza v. Salinas, held that an ex parte writ of possession cannot issue where the property is o...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Under the law, may an RTC validly issue an ex parte writ of possession to a transferee of the purchaser at an extrajudicial foreclosure sale who acquired title after consolidation when the former mortgagors remain in possession and assert an adverse claim?
- Did the Deed of Assignment executed by the Spouses Gallent in favor of Velasquez constitute an equitable mortgage such that the Gallents are adverse possessors entitled to ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)