Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
The petition was based on alleged insufficiency of notice and inadequacy of bid price.
Accordingly, the public auction sale of defendant's properties was set for September 8, 1992. Faced with the impending auction sale, defendant filed with the Court of Appeals, on August 20, 1992, an Urgent Motion to nullify the writ of execution pending appeal and to prevent the scheduled auction sale. On August 31, 1992, the Court of Appeals denied the Urgent Motion and dismissed CA-G.R. SP No. 28365. The auction sale of some of defendant's properties proceeded on September 8, 1992, where the petitioners emerged as the highest bidders. No redemption was effected by defendant within the one-year redemption period. Instead, defendant filed with this Court a Petition for Certiorari , [4] questioning the writ of execution as well as the auction sale. This Court denied the petition in a Resolution dated December 7, 1994. Defendant's first Motion for Reconsideration was denied on February 13, 1995, while its second Motion for Reconsideration was noted without action. The judgment became final and was entered on March 8, 1995. On August 14, 1995, herein private respondent filed a Petition for the Annulment of Public Auction Sale before the Regional Trial Court of San Fernando, La Union, Branch 30, presided by respondent Judge Adolfo F. Alagar. [5] The petition was based on alleged insufficiency of notice and inadequacy of bid price. As an alternative prayer, private respondent sought to be allowed to redeem the properties sold at public auction in the event such auction could not be declared invalid. Upon its filing, the Regional Trial Court of San Fernando, La Union issued a temporary restraining order, the lifetime of which was extended by subsequent status quo orders. Petitioners filed a Motion to Dismiss which the trial court denied on November 21, 1995. Due to the court's refusal to dismiss Civil Case No. 4991, petitioner went to the Court of Appeals with a Petition for Certiorari , Prohibition and Mandamus . [6] Meanwhile, on February 23, 1996, following entry of judgment in the ejectment case, the RTC Branch 29 remanded the case to the MTC for proceedings on matters involving execution of its final judgment. On May 22, 1996, finding that private respondent's right of redemption had already expired, the MTC ordered the issuance of an alias writ of execution for the satisfaction of its January 8, 1992 Decision as well as the issuance of Certificates of Final Sale to the purchasers at the public auction together with the issuance of writs of possession in their favor. It also ordered an accounting of the fruits and income of the properties from October 28, 1993 until delivery of the subject properties to petitioners. Private respondent's Motion for Reconsideration and Motion to Inhibit were both denied on July 17, 1996. These Orders later became final and executory. Still, a Petition for Certiorari [7] assailing the enforcement of the two (2) MTC Orders was filed by private respondent before the Regional Trial Court of San Fernando, La Union where