Title
Supreme Court
Government Service Insurance System vs. Regional Trial Court of Pasig City
Case
G.R. No. 175393
Decision Date
Dec 18, 2009
GSIS foreclosed mortgaged properties, excluding 78 lots; successor-in-interest sued for reconveyance. Courts ruled in favor, ordering GSIS to pay P399.8M despite exemption claims. Final judgment upheld.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 175393)

Facts of the Case

The underlying case revolves around loans amounting to P3,117,000 secured by a real estate mortgage on various properties owned by the Zulueta spouses, which defaulted in the 1970s. Following an extrajudicial foreclosure by GSIS in 1974, GSIS consolidated its title and later sold the properties, some of which were allegedly excluded from the initial foreclosure. In 1990, Santiago, as the successor-in-interest of the Zulueta spouses, filed a claim for the reconveyance of these excluded lots. The RTC ruled in favor of Santiago, reaffirming that GSIS must reconvey the properties that were determined to be wrongfully sold. After various proceedings, GSIS later contested the execution of the RTC’s decision, leading to the consolidated petitions.

Applicable Law

The applicable law primarily involves the GSIS Act of 1997 (Republic Act No. 8291), especially Section 39, which entails exemptions from execution for funds and properties of GSIS, emphasizing the social justice objectives of the law. Additionally, rules regarding finality of judgments and execution of court orders are relevant to the proceedings.

Legal Issues

The primary issues at hand included whether GSIS's funding is exempt from execution pursuant to the GSIS Act, whether the trial court had the authority to enforce the judgment through execution rather than reconveyance, and whether the issues raised by GSIS constituted forum shopping given the previously resolved matters.

Decision Rationale

The Supreme Court dismissed both petitions, referencing the immutability and finality of judgments. The Court emphasized that once a judgment has become final and executory, it cannot be modified or refrained from being executed unless under very exceptional circumstances, none of which were present in this case. The ruling established that despite GSIS's claims regarding the need for reconveyance as a primary mode of execution, the context showed that reconveyance was not feasible due to the propert

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.