Perez v. Perez
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: The underlying dispute concerns the validity of an extra-judicial foreclosure sale of a property mortgaged by the petitioners to the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) to secure an agricultural loan. The petitioners defaulted on their loan payments without making any amortization. Subsequently, DBP initiated foreclosure proceedings. 2. Procedural History: DBP conducted an extra-judicial foreclosure sale under Act No. 3135, as amended, with Democrito Perez emerging as the highest bidder. A certificate of sale was issued and registered, and upon the petitioners' failure to redeem the property, a new title was consolidated in Perez's name. The petitioners filed a civil case for the annulment of the auction sale with damages, which was dismissed by the Regional Trial Court. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, upholding the validity of the auction sale. A motion for reconsideration was subsequently denied by the Court of Appeals. 3. The Petition: The petitioners filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, assailing the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals. They argued that the auction sale was invalid due to non-compliance with the requirements of Act No. 3135, specifically alleging lack of proper notice to them, insufficient posting of notices, and publication of the notice of sale in a newspaper that was not of general circulation in the locality where the property is situated. The Supreme Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order enjoining the implementation of the lower courts' decisions.
Issue(s)
Whether the factual findings of the Court of Appeals are contrary to the undisputed facts on record. Whether there was compliance with the requirements on the posting of notices for the sheriff's auction sale. Whether there was valid publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the place where the real property is situated.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the Decision of the Court of Appeals, upholding the validity of the sheriff's auction sale. The Temporary Restraining Order previously issued was lifted. Costs were against the petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi
On the factual findings: The Court reiterated that it is not a trier of facts and that the factual findings of the appellate court, when in accord with the trial court, are generally binding, unless exceptions like grave abuse of discretion or misapprehension of facts apply. The Court found that none of the exceptions were present in this case, and the findings of the RTC and CA were in unison and supported by the records. On the posting of notices: The Court found no merit in the petitioners' argument that the posting of notices was insufficient. The petitioners' claim that the puericulture center and municipal hall were the same place was deemed a fallacy. Furthermore, the Court noted that petitioners failed to adduce any evidence to support their theory that the notices were not posted for the required period or were removed, thus the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty by the deputy sheriff stood. On the publication in a newspaper of general circulation: The Court held that the Olongapo News was a newspaper of general circulation in Morong, Bataan, in 1978, based on the testimonies of witnesses. Even though the Olongapo News was published in Olongapo City, the Court applied the proviso in P.D. No. 1079, which allows publication in the nearest city or province if no newspaper is published in the locality. The Court concluded that since no newspaper of general circulation was published in Morong, Bataan, the respondents were justified in using the Olongapo News. The Court defined a newspaper of general circulation as one published for dissemination of local news and general information, with a bona fide subscription list, published at regular intervals, and not devoted to a particular class. Consequently, the petitioners were deemed to have constructive notice of the foreclosure proceedings, rendering the public auction sale valid.
Main Doctrine
The Court affirmed the validity of the sheriff's auction sale, finding that the requirements of Act No. 3135, as amended, regarding notice, posting, and publication in a newspaper of general circulation were substantially complied with, thereby deeming the mortgagors to have constructive notice of the foreclosure proceedings.