Title
Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas vs. Jalandoni
Case
G.R. No. 26236
Decision Date
Jul 29, 1927
Eduarda Benedicto mortgaged properties to secure a sugar production loan; court upheld validity, ordered sale for unpaid debt, interest, and penalty.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 207161)

Key Dates

  • Mortgage Execution Date: November 23, 1921
  • Action Filed: March 9, 1926
  • Decision Date: July 29, 1927

Applicable Law

  • Legal Framework: The decision relies on applicable mortgage laws as set forth in the Philippine civil code as they existed prior to 1987, given that the case was decided in 1927.

Facts of the Case

The case arises from a mortgage agreement executed by Eduarda Benedicto in favor of the plaintiff. The mortgage, documented before a notary public, was established to secure a loan against Benedicto's real properties located in Dingle, Iloilo. A lawsuit was initiated by the plaintiff after the mortgage remained unpaid, leading to a demand for recovery of the owed sum, which included principal, accumulated interest, and a specified penalty for non-payment.

Nature of the Mortgage

The mortgage was properly executed and registered, indicating a formal legal obligation by Benedicto to repay the sum owed, as established by the mortgage agreement. The complaint outlined various real properties mortgaged to secure the loan, providing detailed descriptions and benefits associated with the lands as collateral.

Trial and Judgment

The defendant, appointed as the judicial administrator of Benedicto's estate, denied the validity of the claims against the estate in their answer to the complaint. The trial saw the presentation of evidence from the plaintiff only, affirming the existence and validity of the mortgage, including its proper registration. The lower court, upon reviewing the evidence, ruled in favor of the plaintiff, demanding payment of the total sum due.

Appeal and Errors Cited

The defendant appealed the decision, alleging various errors by the lower court. The primary assertions included claims regarding the mortgage's validity, the order for property sale, and the imposition of penalties under the mortgage agreement. The appellate court reviewed each claim thoroughly, reaffirming the lower court's findings and the validity of the mortgage.

Findings and Conclusion

The appellate court found no merit in the defendant's claims a

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.