Case Digest (G.R. No. 171868) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Spouses Francisco D. Yap and Whelma S. Yap v. Spouses Zosimo Dy, Sr., et al. (G.R. Nos. 171868 & 171991, July 27, 2011), the Dumaguete Rural Bank, Inc. (DRBI) held two real estate mortgages executed by spouses Tomas Tirambulo and Salvacion Estorco over seven adjacent lots in Ayungon, Negros Oriental. In 1979, the mortgagors sold all seven lots to Spouses Zosimo Dy, Sr. and Natividad Chiu Dy, and Spouses Marcelino C. Maxino and Remedios Lasola Maxino without the bank’s consent. Following default, DRBI extrajudicially foreclosed one mortgage covering five lots (Lots 1, 4, 5, 6, 8) and purchased them at public auction for ₱216,040.93 in March 1982; the sheriff’s certificate of sale was registered on June 24, 1983. Within the one-year redemption period, the Dy and Maxino spouses tendered ₱50,625.29 to redeem Lots 1 and 6, and later consigned an additional ₱83,850.50. DRBI and the Yaps refused payment, insisting on redemption of the entire foreclosed portfolio. The Dy and Maxinos Case Digest (G.R. No. 171868) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Mortgages
- Spouses Tirambulo–Estorco owned seven parcels (Lots 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 under TCT Nos. T-14777, T-20301, T-14780, T-14794, T-14781, T-14783; and Lot 846 by tax decl.).
- December 3, 1976: Mortgage of Lots 1, 4, 5, 6, 8 to Dumaguete Rural Bank, Inc. (DRBI) for ₱105,000; August 3, 1978: Mortgage of Lots 3 and 846 for ₱28,000.
- October 27, 1979: Tirambulos sold all seven lots to Spouses Dy and Spouses Maxino without DRBI’s consent.
- Foreclosure, Sale and Redemption Attempts
- March 31, 1982: DRBI extrajudicially foreclosed the 1976 mortgage (Lots 1, 4, 5, 6, 8); DRBI was highest bidder at ₱216,040.93; Certificate of Sale registered June 24, 1983.
- July 6, 1983: DRBI sold Lots 1, 3, 6 to Spouses Yap under Deed of Sale with Mortgage; Yaps secured writ of possession.
- May 22–28, 1984: Dys and Maxinos tendered ₱40,000 to DRBI and Yaps; both refused. They consigned ₱50,625.29 with the sheriff for Lots 1, 6, 3; sheriff issued redemption certificate for Lots 1, 6 only, noting Lot 3 was not foreclosed.
- Judicial Proceedings
- June 1984: Dys and Maxinos filed Civil Case No. 8426 (accounting, nullity of sale of Lot 3, injunction, damages) and Case No. 8439 (consolidation, annulment of redemption, damages).
- February 12, 1997: RTC ruled for Yaps; invalidated Dys/Maxinos’ redemption; confirmed Yaps’ title to Lots 1, 3, 6.
- May 17, 2005: CA reversed RTC, held Lot 3 not foreclosed, validated Dys/Maxinos’ redemption of Lots 1, 6, nullified sale of Lot 3 to Yaps, awarded damages. March 15, 2006: CA denied possession restitution but affirmed damages.
- SC review by Yaps and DRBI ensued.
Issues:
- Whether Lot 3 was included in the 1982 foreclosure sale.
- To whom redemption money must be paid.
- Whether Dys and Maxinos validly redeemed Lots 1 and 6.
- Whether DRBI is liable for damages to Dys and Maxinos.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)