Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1984 > May 1984 Decisions > G.R. No. 57617 May 24, 1984 - FORTUNE HOMES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 57617. May 24, 1984.]

FORTUNE HOMES, INC., Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SHERIFF OF BACOLOD CITY and REGISTER OF DEEDS OF BACOLOD CITY, Respondents.

Carlos R. Cruz & Associates for respondent National Investment and Development Corporation.

Tañada, Sanchez, Tañada & Tañada and Bengzon, Zarraga, Narciso, Cudula, Pecson, Ascuna & Bengzon for Respondents.

Yolanda Quisumbing-Javellana & Associates for Petitioner.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; CIVIL ACTIONS; APPEALS; FACTUAL ISSUES RESOLVED BY THE TRIAL COURT AND APPELLATE COURT NOT SUBJECT TO APPEAL; CASE AT BAR. — Fortune Homes has not raised any important legal issue. Its brief has no assignment of errors and no definite prayer. It argues that the foreclosure sale was void because (1) it did not receive the full amount of the loan, (2) the balance of $200,000 was withheld by the PNB, (3) the NIDC prevented fulfillment of the obligation (4) it was not in default and (5) foreclosure was premature. All these contentions, which involve factual issues, were thoroughly and exhaustively resolved by the trial court and the Appellate Court. Together with its other argument that NIDC failed to live up to its purpose they are not issues that can be properly ventilated in this appeal.


D E C I S I O N


AQUINO, J.:


This case is about the validity of an extrajudicial foreclosure on April 13, 1968 of a 1965 mortgage on a 53-hectare lot located in Bacolod City, which was given as security for a loan of one million dollars, and the mortgagor’s liability to pay National Investment and Development Corporation a deficiency of P9,850,915.75 with 6% interest per annum from June 30, 1973 until the amount is paid.chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

Fortune Homes, Inc., the operator of the Fortune Town Subdivision in Bacolod City, mortgaged to National Investment and Development Corporation (a subsidiary of the Philippine National Bank) the said lot in consideration of NlDC’s acting as the primary obligor in the loan of $1,000,000 extended to Fortune Homes by the Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago (Exh. B).

Fortune Homes failed to pay three amortizations on the loan. NIDC was constrained to pay the sum. NIDC asked the sheriff to foreclose the mortgage. On April 29, 1968, he sold the mortgaged property at public auction. NIDC offered the highest bid of P1,446,343.65. The sheriff issued to it a certificate which was annotated on TCT-No, T-15305, the title covering the lot.

Two days before the expiration of the one-year period of redemption, or on July 30, 1969, Fortune Homes filed an injunction suit in the Court of First Instance to prevent NIDC from consolidating its title over the mortgaged lot. The petition was amended to annul the foreclosure sale. Actually, NIDC consolidated its title on April 19, 1974 during the pendency of the case. It was issued a new title (270, Record on Appeal).

The trial court in its 1976 judgment found that the mortgaged was validly foreclosed. On NIDC’s counterclaim, it ordered Fortune Homes to pay the deficiency already mentioned. The judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals which clarified that the interest on the deficiency was six percent per annum.

Fortune Homes has not raised any important legal issue. Its brief has no assignment of errors and no definite prayer.

It argues that the foreclosure sale was void because (1) it old not receive the full amount of the loan, (2) the balance of $200,000 was withheld by the PNB, (3) the NIDC prevented fulfillment of the obligation, (4) it was not in default and (5) the foreclosure was premature.

All these contentions, which involve factual issues, were throughly and exhaustively resolved by the trial court and the Appellate Court.

For example, its contention that it actually received only $800,000 of the loan is belied by the admission of Eriberto Roxas, its board chairman, and Luis L. Gonzaga, a director, that a portion of the "compensating balance" of $200,000 was credited to Fortune Homes’ account (32-33 tsn August 10, 1977; 42-43 tsn February 21, 1972).cralawnad

On the question of its default, there is no doubt that Fortune Homes failed to pay three amortizations which NIDC had to pay (Exh. I-7 to I-9), Under the acceleration clause of the mortgage (Exh. D, par. [c]), NIDC had the right to treat all the amortizations due and demandable, and, as stipulated, to resort to extrajudicial foreclosure.

Fortune Homes’ other argument that NIDC failed to live up to its purpose is not an issue that can be properly ventilated in this appeal.

NIDC in its brief observes that Fortune Homes diverted the proceeds of the loan for other purposes. It was able to develop only twenty percent of the project (pp. 29-30).

WHEREFORE, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed, Costs against the petitioner.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar, Guerrero, Escolin and Gutierrez, Jr., *, JJ., concur.

Concepcion, Jr., Abad Santos and De Castro, JJ., took no part.

Endnotes:



* Justice Gutierrez, Jr. was designated to sit in the Second Division.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman





May-1984 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-39557 May 3, 1984 - ROMULO A. SALES v. ISMAEL MATHAY, SR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-45862-64 May 11, 1984 - WENCESLAO GREGORIO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-45870 May 11, 1984 - MARGARET MAXEY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.xx

  • G.R. Nos. 51549-51 May 11, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGELIO ERVAS

  • G.R. No. 59762 May 11, 1984 - FILOMENO CATORCE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-38141 May 16, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANKISIO ARO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 50350 May 15, 1984 - ROSA MARIA CRUZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 51513 May 15, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELICIANO GOROSPE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-31653 May 18, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENATO P. ORTILLA

  • G.R. No. L-32865 May 18, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO BENARABA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27636 May 19, 1984 - PEDRO A. BERNAS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 56385 May 19, 1984 - RENATO U. REYES v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 59760 May 19, 1984 - BENIGNO C. GASCON v. EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 60544 May 19, 1984 - ARSENIO FLORENDO, JR., ET AL. v. PERPETUA D. COLOMA, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 1432 May 21, 1984 - GEORGE MARTIN, ET AL. v. JUAN MORENO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-38736 May 21, 1984 - FELIPE G. TAC-AN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 44810-12 May 21, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARMANDO P. SEDA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-47118 May 21, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN LAGANZON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 60471 May 21, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REYNALDO TAYAPAD

  • G.R. No. 62270 May 21, 1984 - CRISPIN MALABANAN, ET AL. v. ANASTACIO D. RAMENTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 63796-97 May 21, 1984 - LA CHEMISE LACOSTE, S. A. v. OSCAR C. FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 64112 May 21, 1984 - NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY v. OTILIO ABAYA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27342 May 24, 1984 - CO BUN CHUN v. OVERSEAS BANK OF MANILA

  • G.R. No. 57617 May 24, 1984 - FORTUNE HOMES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-40436 May 25, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARTURO TALARO

  • G.R. No. 62871 May 25, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELICITO TAWAT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30771 May 28, 1984 - LIAM LAW v. OLYMPIC SAWMILL CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-34241 May 28, 1984 - RICARDO P. PRESBITERO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-37945 May 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ADRIANO CAÑETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 53915 May 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE MORENO

  • G.R. No. 58172 May 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO N. GARDON

  • G.R. No. 61487 May 28, 1984 - KHOSROW MINUCHEHR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 65377 May 28, 1984 - MOLAVE MOTOR SALES, INC. v. CRISPIN C. LARON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 66327 May 28, 1984 - JOSE CRUZ v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 51291 May 29, 1984 - FRANCISCO CUIZON, ET AL. v. JOSE R. RAMOLETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 51578 May 29, 1984 - NEW FRONTIER MINES, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 54553 May 29, 1984 - RONQUILLO PERATER, ET AL. v. EULALIO ROSETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 56483 May 29, 1984 - SOSTENES CAMPILLO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 54919 May 30, 1984 - POLLY CAYETANO v. TOMAS T. LEONIDAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30485 May 31, 1984 - BENJAMIN H. AQUINO v. HERMINIO C. MARIANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-35465 May 31, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. KARUNSIANG GUIAPAR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-39999 May 31, 1984 - ROY PADILLA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 63451 May 31, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO ESPIRITU