Title
De Guzman vs. Chico
Case
G.R. No. 195445
Decision Date
Dec 7, 2016
Property sold at tax auction; petitioners failed to redeem. Writ of possession issued to respondent; SC upheld CA, ruling no forum shopping required, ownership affirmed.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 195445)

Case Facts

The case involves property located at 7-A 32 A. Bonifacio Street, Bangkal, Makati City, which was originally registered under the names of the petitioners. On May 24, 2006, the property was sold at a public auction conducted by the City Government of Makati due to tax delinquency, with the respondent emerging as the winning bidder. The City Government executed a Certificate of Sale in favor of the respondent the same day, but the petitioners did not redeem the property within the mandated one-year period. Subsequently, on July 12, 2007, the respondent applied for a new certificate of title, which led to a court order transferring ownership to her and the issuance of a new title in her name.

Court Orders and Proceedings

After owning the property, the respondent sought the issuance of a writ of possession but initially faced a denial from the court due to procedural issues. Following this, on January 14, 2009, she filed an ex parte petition for the writ, which the court granted on April 1, 2009. In August 2009, the petitioners filed a motion to cite the respondent in contempt, arguing that her petition contained a false verification regarding forum shopping. However, by an Order dated January 19, 2010, the court denied the motion on the basis that the ex parte petition was not an initiatory pleading requiring such certification. A subsequent motion for reconsideration was also denied on April 19, 2010.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The petitioners then filed for certiorari before the Court of Appeals, alleging grave abuse of discretion by the trial court in issuing the orders. Nonetheless, the Court of Appeals upheld the decision of the trial court on January 31, 2011, asserting that there was no instance of forum shopping as the proceedings were merely ministerial in nature and thus did not require a certificate of non-forum shopping. They further noted that the petitioners had raised the applicability of the Local Government Code for the first time on appeal, and any claims regarding the tax auction's governing law had become final and executory, rendering them beyond judicial review.

Arguments of the Petitioners

In their appeal, the petitioners contended that the appellate court committed a reversible error by concluding that a certification of non-forum shopping was unnecessary and failed to acknowledge the intended nature of the ex parte proceedings and the necessity of acting in accordance with the relevant laws and jurisprudence. They further argued that all proceedings should resemble an action for accion reivindicatoria, thus declaring the proceedings void.

Arguments of the Respondent

In response, the respondent argued that a certification of non-forum shopping was irrelevant, as the ex parte petition is neither a complaint nor an initiatory pleading, asserting that petitioners were actually engaging in forum shopping by making reference to a concurrent matter under different docket numbers. Additionally, she contended that the petitioners could not identify legal provisions implying that a separate action is mandated for possession post-sale in a tax delinquency scenario.

Supreme Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court denied the petition, affirming the Court of Appeals’ decision that stated no certification against forum shopping was necessary for the writ of possession petiti

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.