Case Summary (G.R. No. 164919)
Facts of the Case
On June 25, 1995, the spouses Lozada entered into a Contract to Sell with PPGI for Unit No. 402, committing to a payment plan structured with a 30% down payment and a 70% balance due upon completion. PPGI later mortgaged the property to CBC, which led to foreclosure due to PPGI's default on its obligations. Following the public auction where CBC purchased the property, a Certificate of Sale was issued in its favor, and CBC subsequently sought possession of the unit through legal processes.
Writ of Possession
CBC filed an ex parte petition for a writ of possession with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), which was granted based on the premise that CBC had legal ownership after the foreclosure. Notably, this writ was issued without notice to the spouses Lozada, who had been in possession of the property since the completion of their purchase agreement with PPGI.
Respondents' Claims and Actions
The spouses Lozada asserted their right to the unit through various communications with both CBC and PPGI, claiming they remained ready to fulfill their financial obligations under the Contract to Sell. They also filed a Notice of Adverse Claim, contending that they were entitled to defend their possession against CBC's actions. Subsequently, they filed a complaint with the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) against CBC and PPGI, seeking to annul PPGI's mortgage in favor of CBC.
Court of Appeals Rulings
The Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the spouses Lozada, concluding that the issuance of the writ of possession was improper because it did not consider the Lozadas’ claims and rights to the unit. The appellate court highlighted the need for a hearing, finding that the RTC had failed to provide due process.
Key Legal Principles and Procedural Due Process
The Supreme Court examined the principles governing ex parte proceedings, particularly concerning the issuance of a writ of possession under Section 7 of Act No. 3135. The Court recognized that while the general rule allows for an ex parte issuance of such writs, exceptions arise where a third party holds the property adversely, necessitating a hearing. The case hinged on whether the spouses Lozada's occupation of the property constituted an "adverse" possession against PPGI, the original mortgagor.
Final Findings
The Supreme Court found that the spouses Lozada were not in adverse possession of the property but were successors-in-interest of PPGI, possessing the property under their contractual agreement.
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 164919)
Background of the Case
- The case involves a Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by China Banking Corporation (CBC) against the spouses Tobias L. Lozada and Erlina P. Lozada challenging the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals.
- The appellate court annulled and set aside the RTC's Order granting CBC a writ of possession over a condominium unit.
Facts of the Case
- On 25 June 1995, the spouses Lozada entered a Contract to Sell with Primetown Property Group, Inc. (PPGI) for a condominium unit (Unit No. 402) at a total price of P1,444,014.04.
- PPGI later executed two Deeds of Real Estate Mortgage in favor of CBC for credit facilities, which included Unit No. 402.
- CBC filed a Petition for Extrajudicial Foreclosure on 31 July 1998 due to PPGI's non-payment of debts.
- CBC was the highest bidder at the public auction held on 11 September 1998, and a Certificate of Sale was issued in its favor on 15 October 1998.
Legal Proceedings Initiated
- Following the foreclosure, an Affidavit of Consolidation was executed by CBC's CEO, which led to the issuance of a new Condominium Certificate of Title (CCT No. 69096) in CBC's name on 12 May 2000.
- The spouses Lozada filed a Notice of Adverse Claim on 13 September 1999 regarding Unit No. 402.
- The legal battle intensified when CBC filed an Ex Parte Petition for a Writ of Possession in July 2001, seeking to take possession of Unit No. 402.
Key Legal Issues
- The