Case Summary (G.R. No. L-2342)
Judgment and Writ of Execution
Initially, Fua Cam Lu obtained a judgment in civil case No. 42125 of the Court of First Instance of Manila, ordering the appellants to pay him the sum of P1,538.04, along with legal interest and costs. Following this, a writ of execution led to the levying of a parcel of land owned by the appellants, valued at P3,550. The sheriff announced a public auction for the land scheduled for December 12, 1933.
Mortgage Agreement
On December 16, 1933, the appellants executed a mortgage in favor of the appellee, wherein their obligation was reduced to P1,200, payable in four installments. This mortgage also secured the payment with a camarin located on the same land. As a result of this agreement, the previously scheduled auction was canceled.
Sheriffs Sale Execution
Despite the mortgage agreement, an alias writ of execution was issued by the Court of First Instance on March 31, 1934. The provincial sheriff proceeded to conduct a public auction on May 28, 1934, selling the land to the appellee for the amount of P1,923.32, without a new notice of sale.
Appellee's Legal Action
Subsequently, on August 29, 1939, Fua Cam Lu initiated an action in the Court of First Instance of Sorsogon against the appellants for their refusal to recognize his title to the land. The appellants contended that the mortgage had novated their original obligation, and that the sale conducted by the sheriff was void due to lack of necessary publication.
Lower Court's Ruling
The lower court rejected the appellants' defenses. It ruled that the appellee was the rightful owner of the land and ordered its delivery to him, failing to address the issue of costs specifically.
Appeal and Majority's Findings
The appellants appealed the lower court's decision. The appellate court concurred that the liability under the original judgment was extinguished through the mortgage agreement, noting that the new obligation was financially and legally incompatible with the original judgment. The court argued that the lack of new publication for the auction rendered the sale void.
Appellee's Position and Legal Basis
The appellee contended that the mortgage merely extended payment terms and did not extinguish his right to execute the judgment. He cited Section 460 of Act No. 190, suggesting that the sheriff had the authority to adjourn and proceed with the sale without new publication. Nevertheless, the appellate court found no evidence showing a written agreement for such adjournment.
Final Judgment
The appellate court ultimately reversed the lower court's judgment, dec
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-2342)
Case Overview
- The plaintiff-appellee, Fua Cam Lu, secured a judgment against the defendants-appellants, Yap Fauco and Yap Singco, in civil case No. 42125, mandating the defendants to pay P1,538.04, including legal interest and costs.
- A parcel of land belonging to the appellants was subsequently levied upon by the provincial sheriff of Sorsogon for sale at public auction due to the execution of the judgment.
- The scheduled sale on December 12, 1933, was suspended after the appellants entered into a mortgage agreement with the appellee on December 16, 1933, which altered the terms of the original obligation.
Mortgage Agreement Details
- The mortgage agreement stipulated that the original obligation of P1,538.04 was reduced to P1,200, payable in four installments of P300 from February 8, 1934, to August 8, 1935.
- The agreement included provisions for attorney's fees amounting to ten percent of any unpaid balance in case of default, as well as the recovery of a discount of P338 granted to the appellants.
- This alteration allowed the sale of the land to be temporarily suspended as the parties settled their obligations.
Execution of Alias Writ and Subsequent Sale
- An alias writ of execution was issued by the Court of First Instance of Manila on March 31, 1934, which led to the sale o