Title
Supreme Court
Rural Bank of Toboso, Inc. vs. Agtoto
Case
G.R. No. 175697
Decision Date
Mar 23, 2011
Agtoto's land was foreclosed after loan default; SC ruled foreclosure valid but limited to real estate mortgage, ordering Bank to return excess proceeds with interest.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 175697)

Factual Background

On August 18, 1981, Agtoto granted a special power of attorney (SPA) to her husband, allowing him to secure a loan on her behalf and to mortgage a parcel of registered land. Two days later, he secured a loan of P130,500 from the Bank, of which P61,068 was secured by the real estate mortgage on Agtoto's land, while the remaining P69,432 was guaranteed by a chattel mortgage on two service boats and a marine engine. After a partial repayment of P14,500, Agtoto defaulted on the loan. Following multiple demands for payment, the Bank initiated an extrajudicial foreclosure of the mortgage on Agtoto's land on August 6, 1990, determining that her debt amounted to P130,500 as of December 31, 1989. The Bank subsequently secured the highest bid during the public auction of the land on September 12, 1990.

Legal Proceedings

Following the auction, Agtoto filed a complaint with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Bacolod City to annul the sale, seeking damages and a temporary restraining order. The RTC ruled on July 15, 1996, in favor of Agtoto, ordering the Bank to return the winning bid amount of P305,000, deducting only the amount secured by the real estate mortgage. An amended order issued on November 26, 1997, included interest on the awarded amount. The Court of Appeals (CA) later upheld the RTC's decision with modifications concerning the amount awarded to Agtoto and the applicable interest rate.

Legal Issues

Two primary issues were presented for consideration:

  1. The validity of the Bank's foreclosure on Agtoto's mortgaged land.
  2. The entitlement of Agtoto to receive P189,497.10 plus interest as excess bid proceeds from the auction sale.

Court's Analysis and Rulings

The Court determined that Agtoto's assertion that the foreclosure sale was void due to lack of authority was unsupported. The SPA granted Rodney sufficient powers to act as her attorney-in-fact, which extended to actions necessary for the mortgage enforcement. Consequently, the Bank acted within its rights when it invoked the powers granted by the SPA for foreclosure purposes.

Furthermore, the Court opined that even if Rodney exceeded his powers, Agtoto's signing of the mortgage documents constituted ratification of his actions. The foreclosure sale was deemed valid, with the distinction that the chattel mortgage secured a separate portion of the loan. Therefore, the Bank was not entitled to claim the entire loan amount from the proceeds of the foreclosure sale of Agtoto's land, necessitating a return of the surplus funds amounting to P189,497.10.

Interest on Excess Proceeds

In addressing the issue of the excess proceeds, the Court emphasized the impo

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.