G.R. No. 157644 - Spouses Topacio vs. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank

Loan and Mortgage Agreement:

Petitioners, spouses Ernesto and Vicenta Topacio, obtained a loan of P400,000.00 from respondent Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank.
To secure the loan, they executed a real estate mortgage over Lot 1224-B-1 LRC Psd-15436, covered by TCT No. T-191117 (now 13554) of the Registry of Deeds of Bulacan, on May 8, 1980.

Foreclosure and Auction Sale:

The petitioners failed to pay the loan, prompting the respondent to file a Petition for Extrajudicial Foreclosure of Mortgage under Act No. 3135.
On November 8, 1982, the Provincial Sheriff of Bulacan sold the mortgaged property at public auction, with the respondent as the highest bidder. A Certification of Sale was issued and registered with the Registry of Deeds.

Writ of Possession and Injunction:

On May 26, 1983, the respondent filed a Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Possession before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Valenzuela City.
The RTC granted the petition on December 12, 1983, conditioned on the posting of a P100,000.00 bond. A writ of possession was issued on February 16, 1984.
However, the writ was not implemented because the petitioners filed a petition to set aside the auction sale and the writ of possession on February 27, 1984. The RTC issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on February 28, 1984, and later a writ of preliminary injunction on March 13, 1984, preventing the implementation of the writ of possession.

Dismissal of the Case:

On December 16, 1986, the RTC dismissed the respondent's petition for the issuance of a writ of possession for "failure to prosecute." The respondent was not served a copy of this dismissal order.

Reorganization and Revival of the Case:

The respondent's operations were shut down by the Monetary Board on January 25, 1985, but were later reorganized and resumed in 1992.
On August 19, 1992, the respondent filed a Motion to Clarify the December 16, 1986 Order and moved for the issuance of an alias writ of possession.
The RTC clarified that the dismissal referred to the "main case for issuance of a writ of possession" and denied the motion for an alias writ of possession on September 18, 1992.
The respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration on May 18, 1993, which the RTC granted on June 2, 1993, setting aside the December 16, 1986 Order and issuing an alias writ of possession.

Final RTC Order:

On October 1, 1993, the RTC denied the petitioners' motion for reconsideration and reiterated the issuance of the alias writ of possession.

Finality of Judgments:
- A judgment or order becomes final and executory only upon proper service to the parties. The December 16, 1986 Dismissal Order was not served on the respondent, and thus, it did not attain finality.
Nature of Writ of Possession:
- The issuance of a writ of possession in extrajudicial foreclosure cases is a ministerial act governed by Act No. 3135, not by the Rules of Civil Procedure. The court has no discretion in granting the writ once the requirements are met.
Res Judicata and Timeliness of Motions:
- The doctrine of res judicata requires a final judgment on the merits, which was absent in this case due to the lack of proper service. Additionally, issues raised for the first time on appeal, such as the timeliness of the Motion for Reconsideration, cannot be considered.
Execution by Motion vs. Independent Action:
- Section 6, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court applies only to civil actions and not to special proceedings like the issuance of a writ of possession. The writ of possession is enforceable immediately upon issuance, and the five-year limitation under Rule 39 does not apply.