Afable v. Belando
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Plaintiff Ladislao Afable filed an action against defendant Carmen Belando for the payment of a promissory note amounting to P1,249.27. Subsequently, Afable obtained a preliminary attachment against Belando's property, including rents from lands in Cavite. A judgment was rendered in favor of Afable, ordering Belando to pay P1,109.27 with interest and penalty. Pursuant to the writ of execution, the attached rents were delivered to Afable. Procedural History: Intervenor-appellee, "La Urbana," Mutual Building and Loan Association, sought to recover the rents delivered to Afable. It appeared that "La Urbana" had previously filed a suit against Belando for foreclosure of a mortgage, secured a judgment for P49,162.62, and upon appeal, the judgment was affirmed. The rents delivered to Afable were collected from the property mortgaged to "La Urbana." The court below ordered the sheriff to return the amount of P1,241.84 (total rents delivered to Afable) to the depository appointed in the foreclosure case. Afable appealed this decision. The Petition: The appeal questioned the legality of attaching the rents of the mortgaged property by Afable in his ordinary action for the collection of a sum of money, considering "La Urbana's" prior mortgage and foreclosure action.
Issue(s)
Whether the rents of the mortgaged property, collected after the obligation falls due, could be attached by a creditor in an ordinary action for the collection of a sum of money, when such rents are already subject to a prior mortgage. Whether "La Urbana" waived its right to the rents by not taking possession of the mortgaged property and instead opting for foreclosure.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the court below, ordering the return of the attached rents to the depository appointed in the foreclosure case of "La Urbana."
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether rents of mortgaged property can be attached by an ordinary creditor: The Court held that according to Article 1877 of the Civil Code and Articles 110 and 111 of the Mortgage Law, a mortgage includes all rents of the mortgaged property not collected when the obligation falls due, and all rents payable until the credit is satisfied. In this case, when Afable attached the rents, they were already liable for the mortgage in favor of "La Urbana" due to the prior foreclosure action and judgment. Therefore, these rents could not have been legally attached by Afable in his ordinary collection suit. The Court emphasized that it is immaterial whether the judgment in favor of "La Urbana" specifically mentioned the rents, as the law itself includes them in the mortgage. The fact that the court below excluded a portion of the amount from the deposit was also deemed correct, as that sum also comprised rents included in "La Urbana's" mortgage. On the issue of waiver: The Court found no merit in Afable's contention that "La Urbana" waived its rights by not taking possession of the property and instead pursuing foreclosure. The Court stated that it failed to see how abstaining from taking possession and initiating foreclosure proceedings implied a waiver of its rights under the Civil Code and the Mortgage Law concerning the rents from the mortgaged property. The legal inclusion of rents in a mortgage is a statutory right that is not automatically relinquished by pursuing a specific remedy like foreclosure.
Main Doctrine
Rents of mortgaged property, collected after the obligation falls due, are included in the mortgage and cannot be attached by a creditor in an ordinary action for the collection of a sum of money, as they are already liable for the mortgage in favor of the mortgagee.