Case Summary (G.R. No. 202466)
Procedural History
The Petition for Review on Certiorari was filed under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, aiming to annul and set aside the RTC's decision dated November 17, 2014, which ruled the sheriff's certificates of sale as void. The motion for reconsideration of this decision was denied by the RTC on January 9, 2015.
Factual Background
The disputed property, initially registered under So Keng Koc, underwent several legal challenges due to levies and attachments resulting from collection suits against So. Specifically, a writ of attachment was placed on the property in September 1998 due to a complaint filed by Sy Sen Ben. This was followed by additional collection suits filed by the petitioner spouses Crisologo against So.
Development of Ownership
In October 1998, while the property was still subject to these legal proceedings, the respondents negotiated with various creditors, culminating in a Deed of Absolute Sale for the property executed by So in favor of the respondents. This resulted in the cancellation of the original TCT and the issuance of new titles to the respondents.
Compromise Agreements and Litigation
A compromise agreement was reached in Sy's collection case, resulting in a court order for So to transfer his properties. The petitioners' cases also resulted in a judgment holding So and Limso liable, which was appealed and eventually affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Auction Sale and Certificates of Sale
As part of enforcement of the court's decision, an auction sale was scheduled for August 26, 2010. Despite attempts by the respondents to exclude the descended titles from the sale, the RTC denied their motion, and an auction proceeded, with the petitioner spouses emerging as the successful bidders.
Subsequent Legal Actions by Respondents
After the auction, the respondents filed a complaint to annul the certificates of sale, claiming procedural failures regarding the cash payment requirement and the lack of mention of their third-party claims in the certificates.
RTC's Decision and Rationale
The RTC ruled the certificates of sale void, citing the sheriff's failure to comply with rule mandates regarding cash payment and explicit mention of third-party claims. The RTC deemed these requirements as essential, rendering the sales invalid due to non-compliance.
Petitioners' Arguments
In their petition, the petitioners argued that the RTC misinterpreted the provisions of the Rules of Court. They contended that Section 21 of Rule 39 does not mandate cash payment when a third-party claim exists. Furthermore, they distinguished their case from precedents cited by the respondents, asserting that prior levies established their rights more firmly than in referenced cases.
Respondents' Position and Court Reply
The respondents maintained that strict adherence to procedural requirements was essential for the validity of the sale. They reiterated the RTC's conclusions regarding mandatory compliance with cash payment and declarations regard
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 202466)
Case Background
- Petitioners Jesus G. Crisologo, Nanette B. Crisologo, James Ian Yeung, and Marlina T. Sheng filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
- The petition seeks to annul the Decision dated November 17, 2014, of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Davao City, Branch 16, in Civil Case No. 33, 581-10, and its Order dated January 9, 2015, which denied the motion for reconsideration.
- The case centers around a parcel of land covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-51636, initially registered in the name of So Keng Koc, which has been subject to various levies and attachments due to collection cases against So.
Procedural History
- In 1998, Sy Sen Ben filed a complaint against So and Robert Allan Limso, leading to the property being levied and a writ of attachment recorded.
- The petitioner spouses Crisologo also filed collection suits against So and Limso, resulting in further levies on the property.
- On October 7, 1998, a Deed of Absolute Sale was executed between So and the respondents, Alicia and Gregorio Hao, despite the property being under levy.
- The property subsequently underwent subdivision, resulting in TCT Nos. T-344592 and T-344593 issued to the respondents.
RTC Decision
- The RTC ruled that the Sher