G.R. No. 141297 - DOMINGO R. MANALO, VS. COURT OF APPEALS (SPECIAL TWELFTH DIVISION) AND PAIC SAVINGS AND MORTGAGE BANK. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, respondent instituted extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings over the mortgaged lots. On August 22, 1984, the Pasay City property was sold at a public auction to the respondent itself, after tendering the highest bid. The respondent then caused the annotation of the corresponding Sheriff's Certificate of Sale [3] on the title of the land on December 4, 1984. After the lapse of one year, or the statutory period extended by law to a mortgagor to exercise his/her right of redemption, title was consolidated in respondent's name for failure of Vargas to redeem. On October 29, 1986, the Central Bank of the Philippines filed a Petition [4] for assistance in the liquidation of the respondent with the Regional Trial Court. The petition was given due course in an Order [5] dated May 19, 1987. It appears that from the years 1986 to 1991, Vargas negotiated with the respondent (through its then liquidator, the Central Bank) for the repurchase of the foreclosed property. The negotiations, however, fizzled out as Vargas cannot afford the repurchase price fixed by the respondent based on the appraised value of the land at that time. On October 4, 1991, Vargas filed a case for annulment of mortgage and extra-judicial foreclosure sale before Branch 116 of the Pasay City Regional Trial Court. On July 22, 1993, the court rendered a decision [6] dismissing the complaint and upholding the validity of the mortgage and foreclosure sale. On appeal, the appellate court upheld the assailed judgment and declared the said mortgage and foreclosure proceedings to be in accord with law. [7] This decision of the Court of Appeals subsequently became final and executory when we summarily dismissed Vargas's Petition for Review on Certiorari for having been filed beyond the reglementary period. [8] In the meantime, on June 22, 1992, respondent petitioned the Regional Trial Court, Branch 112, of Pasay City, herein court a quo , for the issuance of a writ of possession for the subject property in Civil Case No. 9011. This is in view of the consolidation of its ownership over the same as mentioned earlier. Vargas and S. Villanueva Enterprises, Inc. filed their opposition thereto. After which, trial ensued. During the pendency of Civil Case No. 9011 (for the issuance of a writ of possession), Vargas, on December 23, 1992, executed a Deed of Absolute Sale [9] selling, transferring, and conveying ownership of the disputed lot in favor of a certain Armando Angsico. Notwithstanding this sale, Vargas, still representing herself to be the lawful owner of the property, leased the same to petitioner Domingo R. Manalo on August 25, 1994. Pertinent provisions of the lease agreement [10] state: "3. (a) The lease is for a period of ten year lease (sic), involving 450 square meters, a portion of the above 919 square meter property. x x x (d) The LESSEE has to introduce into the said 450 square meter premises improvements thereon (sic) consisting of one story building to house a Karaoke M