Sta.Ignaciavs.

CA
230SCRA513
March1,1994

Facts:
OnJanuary14,1980,thedefendantsSta.IgnaciaRuralBank,Inc.extendedtothe
plaintiffspousesConradoPabloandJuanitaGonzalesaloantotallingP12,109.75.Asasecurity,
theplaintiffspousesexecutedinfavorofthedefendantbankaRealEstateMortgage(Exh."A")
overtheirresidentialhouseandtwo(2)lotscoveredbyFreePatentTitle,OCTNo.P7941(Exh.
"E")locatedatPoblacionNorte,Mayantoc,Tarlac.Theplaintiffspousesdefaultedinthe
paymentoftheirobligation,asaresultofwhich,thedefendantbankfiledwiththeProvincial
SheriffofTarlacapetitionforextrajudicialforeclosureoftheirrealestatemortgageunderAct
3135.OnJuly28,1981,theaforecitedhouseandlotsoftheplaintiffspousesweresoldatpublic
auctionwiththedefendantbankasthehighestbidderforP13,168.35(Exhs."B""D",inclusive).
Thereafter,theCertificateofSale(Exh."D")wasexecutedinfavorofthedefendantbankon
September29,1981andthesamewasregisteredwiththeRegisterofDeedsofTarlacon
November5,1981(Exh."E2").Theownershipofthesubjecthouseandlotswasconsolidatedin
favorofthedefendantbankvirtueofthefinaldeedofsaleexecutedonNovember5,1983(Exh.
"I").OnDecember19,1984,thedefendantbanksoldtheaforementionedrealestatesto
defendantspousesAlbertoLucasandNeliaRicoforP47,500.00(Exh."K"),andTransfer
CertificatesofTitleNos.184687and184688(Exhs."L"and"M")overthehouseandlotswere
subsequentlyissuedinthenameofsaiddefendantspouses.Hence,thecomplaintforthe
repurchaseofthesubjecthouseandlots,annulmentoftitleanddamagesfiledonMarch20,1986
bytheplaintiffspouses.

Issue:Whethertheappellantshadexercisedtheirrighttoredeemwithintheredemptionperiodor
whethersuchrighthadalreadyprescribed,

Ruling:

Yes,theappellantshadexercisedtheirrighttoredeemwithintheredemptionperiod.

Inthiscase,itwillberecalledthatthemortgagedhouseandlotsweresoldatpublic
auctiontotheappelleebankonJuly28,1981.However,theSheriff'sCertificateofSalewas
registeredonlyonNovember5,1981.UnderAct3135,theappellantsmayredeemthesubject
houseandlotsuntilNovember5,1982beingthelastdayoftheoneyearperiodofrepurchase
allowedbysaidlaw.Following,then,therulingoftheSupremeCourtinthecaseofBelisariovs.
IntermediateAppellateCourt,supra,theappellantsstillhadfive(5)yearsfromNovember5,
1982(theexpirationoftheredemptionperiodunderAct3135),oruntilNovember5,1987,
withinwhichtoexercisetheirrighttorepurchaseunderthePublicLandAct.
Moreover,forpurposesofascertainingwhetherappellantsexercisedtheirrighttorepurchase
effectively,wehaveonlytoconsidertheirfilingoftheactionforthe"repurchaseofthesubject
houseandlots,annulmentoftitleanddamages"onMarch20,1986againsttheappelleebankand
theappelleespouses,whichwasfiledwithinthefiveyearperiodtorepurchase.Thequestion
nowofwhethertheappellanthadactuallytendered,depositedorconsignedincourtthe
redemptionpriceforthesubjecthouseandlotsbecomesimmaterialinviewofthefilingofsaid
actiontorepurchasewhichhasbeenequivalenttoanoffertoredeemandhastheeffectperseof
preservingtheirrightofrecoveringthedisputedhouseandlots.(Tolentinovs.CourtofAppeals,
106SCRA513;Tiosecovs.CourtofAppeals,143SCRA705).

FollowingthedoctrineenunciatedintheRuralBankofDavaoCitycase,itisclearfroma
perusalofthefactualantecedentsatbarthatthepleaforrepurchasewasnottimebarredatthe
timeitwasmade.Whenthecertificateofsaleinfavorofpetitionerwasregisteredwiththe
RegisterofDeedsonNovember5,1981,privaterespondentshadtwoyears,reckonedfromsaid
date,withinwhichtoredeemthepropertyfrompetitioner,andanotherfiveyears,under
CommonwealthActNo.141,countedfromtheexpirationoftheredemptionperiod,toeffect
repurchasewhichprivaterespondentspreciselydidwhenthesuitbelowwasinitiatedonMarch
20,1986.