Title
Ocampo vs. Domalanta
Case
G.R. No. L-21011
Decision Date
Aug 30, 1967
Foreclosure sale confirmed; appellant's objections dismissed due to res judicata, finality of confirmation order, and lack of evidence supporting claims.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-21011)

Background of the Case

The legal dispute originated from a foreclosure action (Civil Case 45778) in the Court of First Instance of Manila, where Isabel Ocampo, then known as Isabel O. Vda. de Chi Chioco, was ordered to pay Domalanta a total of P2,500.00, which included P2,000.00 principal and P500.00 for attorney's fees. Upon failing to make payment within the stipulated period, a writ of execution led to the public auction sale of her mortgaged property on May 8, 1962. Domalanta bought the property for P3,537.00. Despite Ocampo's objections regarding lack of proper notification and the sale price being unreasonably low, the court confirmed the sale on June 2, 1962.

Legal Proceedings and Appeal

Following the confirmation of the sale, Ocampo filed a new suit (Civil Case N-496) in the Court of First Instance of Cavite to annul that sale. She alleged insufficient notification regarding the sale and cited that the sale price was unconscionable. Domalanta moved to dismiss this complaint, arguing res judicata since the issues raised were identical to those previously adjudicated in the foreclosure case. On November 9, 1962, the lower court dismissed Ocampo's case with prejudice.

Legal Principles Involved

A key issue is whether the court's order confirming the sheriff's sale acted as a bar to Ocampo's subsequent action. It is established that confirmation of a sale in judicial foreclosure proceedings effectively vests interests in the purchaser and is treated as a final order. The court noted that Ocampo's objections regarding lack of notice and purported irregularities were previously raised but not substantiated with evidence, rendering her current claims inadmissible.

Conclusion on Res Judicata and Finality

The court upheld that the legality of the foreclosure sale was an issue that could have been – and indeed was – addressed during the prior proceedings. Accordingly, the dismissal of Ocampo's subsequent complaint was justified under the doctrine of conclusiv

...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.