Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1962 > April 1962 Decisions > G.R. No. L-16843 April 30, 1962 - GONZALO PUYAT & SONS INC. v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-16843. April 30, 1962.]

GONZALO PUYAT & SONS INC., Petitioner-Appellee, v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Oppositor-Appellant.

Feria, Manglapus & Associates for Petitioner-Appellee.

Ramon B. de los Reyes and Antonio P. Ruiz for Oppositor-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. MORTGAGE; FORECLOSURE; LIENS SUBORDINATE TO THE MORTGAGE; REGISTER OF DEEDS WITHOUT COURT’S ORDER TO ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF TITLE WITHOUT ANNOTATION OF LIENS. — Upon a proper foreclosure of the first mortgage, all liens subordinate to the mortgage are, likewise, foreclosed, and the purchaser at public auction, held pursuant thereto, acquires title free from the subordinate liens. Ordinarily, therefore, and unless representation is duly presented, at the time of the cancellation of the certificate of title by reason of the foreclosure of the superior mortgage lien, that irregularities attended the foreclosure, such as lack of notice to or non-inclusion of inferior lien holders in the foreclosure suit or proceedings, the Register of Deeds, without court’s order, is authorized to issue the new titles without carrying over the annotation of subordinate liens.


D E C I S I O N


BARRERA, J.:


The instant case arose from a petition by Gonzalo Puyat & Sons, Inc. filed under Section 112 of the Registration Law, Act No. 496, in the Court of First Instance of Rizal, sitting as cadastral court asking for the reannotation in the subsequently issued certificates of title, of Entries Nos. 26980 and 41373, concerning a sale in its favor, originally appearing in the cancelled Transfer Certificate of Title No. 31423 registered in the name of Ricardo Santos.

The records show that to satisfy a favorable judgment obtained by Gonzalo Puyat & Sons, Inc. against Santos in another case, the parcel of land covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 31423 was sold at public auction and awarded to said judgment creditor, the sole bidder therein. Upon expiration of the redemption period, the sheriff issued the corresponding certificate of sale in favor of Puyat, which deed was accordingly registered on August 12, 1957 and annotated at the back of said TCT No. 31423. It appears in the same certificate, however, that said property was already subject to a registered mortgage in favor of the Philippine National Bank as of March, 1946, prior to the annotations in favor of Puyat. Subsequently, the Bank, foreclosing the mortgage extra-judicially and having offered the highest bid in the ensuing public auction, obtained a certificate of sale which was registered on December 20, 1957. It does not appear that the judgment creditor, Gonzalo Puyat & Sons, Inc. was notified of the foreclosure and sale of the property.

At the expiration of the period to redeem the property, the Bank consolidated its ownership over the same as a consequence of which TCT No. 31423 (in the name of Ricardo Santos) was cancelled and TCT No. 5586 was issued in its name. The encumbrance in favor of Gonzalo Puyat & Sons, however, was not carried in said new title. The lot was later subdivided into two and sold to Dr. Salvador R. Samson and Celedonia Medina Samson, who were issued TCT Nos. 63306 and 63305, respectively. These last two titles, similarly, did not contain the annotation of the sale to Puyat. Thereupon, Gonzalo Puyat & Sons, Inc. filed in the Court of First Instance of Rizal, sitting as a land registration court, a petition for the purpose already stated at the beginning of this opinion.

Opposing the same, the Bank contested the jurisdiction of the court to pass upon the petition on the ground that petitioner was seeking to enforce an alleged right (to redeem the property), which should properly be ventilated in a regular court, and disclaimed knowledge of the non-inclusion of any lien, originally appearing in TCT No. 31423, in TCT No. 55826 subsequently issued in its name.

Finding that the encumbrance in favor of petitioner was actually omitted in the new titles without proper court authorization, the court, without resolving the merits of the alleged right of petitioner on the property, granted the petition and directed the reannotation of the said encumbrance on TCT Nos. 55826, 63305 and 63306. Hence, this appeal by the oppositor Bank.

There seems to be no controversy as to the fact of the petitioner’s position as a junior encumbrancer, it having obtained a lien on the property subject to the previous mortgage in favor of the Philippine National Bank. The only issue here is whether the Register of Deeds of Rizal has authority to omit, without any specific court order, to transfer or carry over the annotation of Puyat’s junior lien appearing in the cancelled certificate of title, to the new title issued to the first mortgagee by reason of the consolidation of the latter’s right upon foreclosure of its mortgage.

It is already well-settled that upon a proper foreclosure of a first mortgage, all liens subordinate to the mortgage are likewise foreclosed, and the purchaser at public auction held pursuant thereto acquires title free from the subordinate liens. 1 Ordinarily, therefore, and unless representation is duly presented at the time of the cancellation of the certificate of title by reason of the foreclosure of the superior mortgage lien, that irregularities attended the foreclosure, such as lack of notice to or non-inclusion of inferior lien holders in the foreclosure suit or proceeding, 2 the register of Deeds is authorized to issue the new titles without carrying over the annotation of subordinate liens. And that is what has happened in the case at bar. At the time the Register of Deeds cancelled the old title of Santos, the mortgagor, upon the consolidation of the first mortgagee’s right by virtue of the foreclosure of the first mortgage, and issued the new title in favor of the Philippine National Bank as purchaser in the public auction, no irregularity was brought to his attention. Hence the Register of Deeds correctly acted, even without court order, in not carrying over to the new title, annotations of inferior liens appearing in the old title. And this did not prejudice the right, if any, of petitioner Puyat to questions, in an appropriate ordinary action, the legality of the foreclosure proceedings or the effect of the alleged lack of notice to it of such foreclosure. Certainly such questions can not be litigated in a summary proceeding such as is contemplated under Section 112 of Act 496 invoked by petitioner Gonzalo Puyat & Sons, Inc.

WHEREFORE, the order of the lower court appealed from is hereby reversed, without prejudice to the proper determination in an appropriate proceeding or action, of appellee’s alleged right over the property. No costs.

Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L. and Paredes, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. El Hogar Filipino v. Philippine National Bank, 64 Phil., 582; Capistrano v. Philippine National Bank Et. Al., G.R. No. L-9628, August 30, 1957; Bank of the P. I. v. Noblejas, 105 Phil., G.R. No. L-12128, march 31, 1959.

2. Even in instances of this nature it has been held that failure to so notify or include inferior lienholders does not invalidate the foreclosure proceedings (Somes v. Government, 62 Phil., 432) but at most will leave the equity of redemption unforeclosed as against such lienholder not notified or not-included as party-defendant (Sun Life Ass. Co. of Canada v. Gonzales, 52 Phil., 271; Government v. Cajigaz, 55 Phil. 667).




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






April-1962 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-18462 April 13, 1962 - MENELEO B. BERNARDEZ v. FRANCISCO T. VALERA

  • G.R. No. L-13704 April 18, 1962 - BENJAMIN T. ASUNCION v. LUZ DE ASIS DE AQUINO, ETC. ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15162 April 18, 1962 - PHILIPPINE AMERICAN DRUG CO. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16642 April 18, 1962 - ANTONIO RAGUDO, ET AL. v. EMELITA R. PASNO

  • G.R. No. L-16864 April 18, 1962 - VALDERRAMA LUMBER MANUFACTURERS’ CO. INC. v. VICENTE N. CUSI, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-19440 and L-19447 April 18, 1962 - CESAR CLIMACO, ET AL. v. HIGINIO B. MACADAEG, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 518 April 23, 1962 - DOMINADOR CARLOS v. BENIGNO PALAGANAS

  • G.R. No. L-11816 April 23, 1962 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. OSCAR CASTELO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14716 April 23, 1962 - TERESA REALTY, INC. v. JOSE SISON

  • G.R. No. L-15499 April 23, 1962 - ANGELA M. BUTTE v. MANUEL UY & SONS, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-15634 April 23, 1962 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO LLANTO

  • G.R. No. L-15714 April 23, 1962 - LORENZA FABIAN, ET AL. v. EULOGIO MENCIAS, ETC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15778 April 23, 1962 - TAN TIONG BIO, ET AL. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. L-15892 April 23, 1962 - FERNANDO LACSON, ET AL. v. BACOLOD CITY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16665 April 23, 1962 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. IRINEO SANTELLA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17344 April 23, 1962 - TALISAY-SILAY MILLING CO., INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17349 April 23, 1962 - NATIONAL SHIPYARDS AND STEEL CORPORATION v. MARTIN ARTOZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-12219 April 25, 1962 - FRANCISCO PASCUAL v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

  • G.R. No. L-13918 April 25, 1962 - CALTEX (PHILIPPINES) INC. v. KATIPUNAN LABOR UNION

  • G.R. No. L-14530 April 25, 1962 - LEONA AGLIBOT, ET AL. v. ANDREA ACAY MAÑALAC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14591 April 25, 1962 - PINDAÑGAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY, INC. v. JOSE P. DANS, ETC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15080 April 25, 1962 - IN RE: RICARDO R. CARABALLO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-15404 April 25, 1962 - ILDEFONSO SUZARA v. HERMONES CALUAG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16066 April 25, 1962 - ENCARNACION BACANI, ET AL. v. FELICISIMA PAZ SAMIA GALAURAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16856 April 25, 1962 - OLIVO G. RUIZ v. CEDAR V. PASTOR

  • G.R. No. L-16954 April 25, 1962 - ARMINIO RIVERA v. LITAM & COMPANY, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16997 April 25, 1962 - RAMCAR INCORPORATED v. DOMINGO GARCIA

  • G.R. No. L-17016 April 25, 1962 - WORLDWIDE PAPER MILLS, INC. v. LABOR STANDARDS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-12174 April 26, 1962 - MARIA B. CASTRO v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. L-14455 April 26, 1962 - LINO GUTIERREZ v. LUCIANO L. MEDEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15369 April 26, 1962 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TIMOTEO CRUZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15427 April 26, 1962 - SAN MIGUEL BREWERY, INC. v. ELPIDIO FLORESCA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15638 April 26, 1962 - HERMOGENES CONCEPCION, JR. v. FRANCISCO F. GONZALES IV

  • G.R. No. L-16384 April 26, 1962 - IN RE: JAYME S. TAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • Nos. L-17325 and L-16594 April 26, 1962


  • SYLLABUS


    1. TAXATION; PERCENTAGE TAXES; FORFEITURE OF BOND WITHIN TEN YEARS. — Upon the execution of a bond to guarantee the payment of an internal revenue tax, the tax-payer, as principal, and the bondsman, as surety, assumed an obligation entirely distinct from the tax and became subject to an entirely different kind of liability. A bond being a written contract imposing rights and liabilities, the government, pursuant to article 1144 of the new Civil Code, has the right to take court action for its forfeiture within 10 years from the accrual of the right of action.

    2. ID.; ID.; ID.; SECTION 332 (c) OF REVENUE CODE NOT APPLICABLE. — Section 332 (c) of the Revenue Code, is not applicable to actions for forfeiture of bonds. The period of limitation provided in this section is evidently confined to actions for the collection of taxes.

    3. ID.; ID.; ID.; PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD FOR PAYMENT OF TAX INTERRUPTED BY EXECUTION OF BOND. — Obligations contracted in a bond by a tax-payer constitute written acknowledgments of the debt and interrupt the 5-year period of prescription for the payment of tax.

    G.R. No. L-15265 April 27, 1962 - BAGUIO GOLD MINING COMPANY v. BENJAMIN TABISOLA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16467 April 27, 1962 - FLORENTINA MATA DE STUART v. NICASIO YATCO

  • G.R. No. L-11964 April 28, 1962 - REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MANILA v. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. L-12116 April 28, 1962 - MACARIA TINIO DE DOMINGO v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-12570 April 28, 1962 - VICENTE PAZ, ETC., ET AL. v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-14166 & L-14320 April 28, 1962 - FINLEY J. GIBBS, ET AL. v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14231 April 28, 1962 - CATALINO BALBECINO, ET AL. v. WENCESLAO M. ORTEGA, ETC., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-14546-47 April 28, 1962 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BASILIO PADUA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14833 April 28, 1962 - OROMECA LUMBER CO., INC. v. SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15089 April 28, 1962 - TEODULO DOMINGUEZ, ET AL. v. ROMAN B. DE JESUS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15338 April 28, 1962 - CALTEX REFINERY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION-PAFLU v. ANTONIO LUCERO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16005 April 28, 1962 - MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-16172 April 28, 1962 - ARSENIO SUMILANG v. GUALBERTO CASTILLO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16219 April 28, 1962 - NATIVIDAD VERNUS-SANGCIANGCO v. DIOSDADO SANGCIANGCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16716 April 28, 1962 - PEDRO R. JAO, ET AL. v. ROYAL FINANCING CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16804 April 28, 1962 - FRANCO J. ALTOMONTE v. PHILIPPINE AMERICAN DRUG COMPANY

  • G.R. No. L-17044 April 28, 1962 - EUSTAQUIO JUAN, ET AL. v. VICENTE ZUÑIGA ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17047 April 28, 1962 - ATLANTIC MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. MANILA PORT TERMINAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17247 April 28, 1962 - C. N. HODGES v. ELPIDIO JAVELLANA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-17481 & L-17537-59 April 28, 1962 - LIBERATA ANTONIO ESTRADA, ET AL. v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17887 April 28, 1962 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO SANTOS

  • G.R. No. L-18751 April 28, 1962 - A. C. ESGUERRA & SONS v. DOMINADOR R. AYTONA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-10909 April 30, 1962 - ADELAIDA TABOTABO, ET AL. v. AGUEDO TABOTABO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16843 April 30, 1962 - GONZALO PUYAT & SONS INC. v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK

  • G.R. No. L-17082 April 30, 1962 - MERCEDES RAFFIÑAN v. FELIPE L. ABEL

  • G.R. No. L-17378 April 30, 1962 - NORTHWEST AIRLINES, INC. v. NORTHWEST AIRLINES PHILIPPINES EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, ET AL.