Case Summary (G.R. No. 210766)
Background of Mortgage and Foreclosure
On August 5, 1979, Maria V. de Casimiro constituted two real estate mortgages on a 5,109 square meter parcel of land registered under Transfer Certificate of Title No. 3573 (38903) in Rizal. The loans amounting to PHP 75,000.00 each were obtained by her sons, Eduardo and Alfonso V. Casimiro, from Traders Royal Bank. Upon their default, the bank extrajudicially foreclosed the mortgages, selling the property at public auction to itself as the highest bidder, with two certificates of sale dated August 14, 1979, subsequently registered.
Redemption Rights
The one-year legal redemption period for the property, stemming from the foreclosure, was set to expire on January 11, 1981. Prior to this date, Eliseo Pambid had initiated Civil Case No. C-7669 against Eduardo V. Casimiro and Hijos de P. Casimiro, Inc. for specific performance. A judgment in favor of Pambid was rendered on October 1, 1979, which included various monetary awards and ordered the defendants to reimburse him. An Alias Writ of Execution was issued in December 1980, allowing for the levy on Eduardo’s rights to redeem the property.
Pambid's Redemption
On January 6, 1981, a Certificate of Sale was issued to Eliseo Pambid for Eduardo Casimiro's interest in the property. When Pambid sought to redeem the property from the Traders Royal Bank, he confirmed with Eduardo, who declined to do so. Consequently, on January 8, 1981, Pambid paid the redemption amount to the bank, and neither Eduardo nor Maria acted to redeem the property before or after this payment.
Judicial Proceedings for Reconveyance
Following the successful redemption by Pambid, an Order was issued in June 1981, prompting the issuance of a writ of possession in favor of Pambid. Eventually, the ownership of the property was consolidated unto him. On September 7, 1981, Maria V. de Casimiro filed Civil Case No. C-9523 seeking reconveyance against Pambid, the Sheriff, and the Register of Deeds, arguing the illegality of the levy since she claimed ownership and was not a party in Pambid’s prior case.
Court's Analysis of Redemption Waiver
The petitioner contended that the waiver of the redemption right by her son Eduardo was invalid as she had not authorized him to relinquish the right that belonged to her as the property owner. However, the Court emphasized that the property was mortgaged with her consent, establishing that Eduardo, as the debtor, possessed the right of redemption under Section 6 of Article 3135. The Court noted that the legal framework permits only the debtor or successors to exercise this right upon an extrajudicia
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 210766)
Case Citation and Background
- Citation: G.R. No. 65236, October 12, 1989, 258-A Phil. 218
- Petitioner: Maria V. de Casimiro
- Respondents: Intermediate Appellate Court, Hon. Marcelino N. Sayo, Hon. Alfredo N. Gorgonio, Ex-Officio Sheriff Rodrigo N. Saure, the Register of Deeds, District III, Caloocan City, Eliseo Pambid
- Court: Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Decision Date: October 12, 1989
- Nature of the Case: Review of the Court of Appeals' decision denying a petition for certiorari regarding a dismissal of a complaint for reconveyance of real property.
Procedural History
- The petitioner sought a review of the July 28, 1983 decision of the Court of Appeals in AC-G.R. No. 00120-SP.
- The Court of Appeals held that:
- The proper remedy for the petitioner was to file an appeal rather than a petition for certiorari.
- The redemption of the property by private respondent Eliseo Pambid was lawful as the debtor-mortgagor Eduardo Casimiro had waived his right to redeem.
Factual Background
- On August 5, 1979, Maria V. de Casimiro constituted two real estate mortgages on a parcel of land (5,109 square meters) registered in her name as security for loans obtained by her sons from Traders Royal Bank.
- Following the borrowers' default, the mortgages underwent extrajudicial foreclosure, resulting in the property bei