Title
Supreme Court
Luis G. Ablaza vs. Gabriel A. Ignacio
Case
G. R. No. L-11466
Decision Date
May 23, 1999
Plaintiff seeks deficiency judgment after chattel mortgage foreclosure; Supreme Court rules in favor, applying Chattel Mortgage Law over conflicting Civil Code provisions.

Case Summary (G. R. No. L-11466)

Background of the Case

In the underlying matter, the defendant, Gabriel A. Ignacio, borrowed a sum of P52,250 from Luis G. Ablaza, which was set to be repaid within sixty days, bearing an interest of 12% per annum. To secure this loan, the defendant executed a chattel mortgage over an Oldsmobile vehicle. Upon the defendant's failure to repay the loan by the maturity date, the plaintiff extrajudicially foreclosed the chattel mortgage, resulting in the sale of the vehicle for P700 at a public auction.

Judicial Proceedings and Initial Ruling

After the foreclosure, a remaining balance of P2,675 was established when the proceeds from the sale were deducted from the total obligation including interest and agreed-upon liquidated damages. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit to recover this amount. Initially, after the defendant did not respond to the summons and was declared in default, the lower court heard the plaintiff's evidence. However, on August 30, 1956, the court dismissed the case, citing Articles 2141 and 2115 of the Civil Code, concluding that the plaintiff was not entitled to the deficiency judgment as it was contrary to the law.

Legal Provisions at Issue

The trial court's decision rested on the interpretation of Article 2115 of the new Civil Code, which states that the sale of the pledged property extinguishes the principal obligation irrespective of whether the sale proceeds meet the total debt, thereby leading to the ruling that the creditor cannot recover any deficiency. The court erroneously applied this provision without recognizing the conflicting regulations established under the Chattel Mortgage Law.

Misinterpretation of Chattel Mortgage Law

The appellate court pointed out a significant error in the lower court's reasoning. The provisions of the Civil Code on pledge should only apply to chattel mortgages in ways that do not conflict with the Chattel Mortgage Law. Specifically, Section 14 of the Chattel Mortgage Law contradicts Article 2115 by establishing the processes and consequences regarding the foreclosure of chattel mortgages, notably allowing creditors to pursue deficiency judgments after foreclosure sales.

Doctrine on Deficiency Judgments

Addressing the implications of a deficiency judgment, the appellate court reinforced the view that a creditor may claim for any deficiency following the foreclosure of a chattel mortgage, especially when the sale price falls short of the total obligation. Drawing on the precedent from case law, specifica

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.