By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that filing an appeal cannot automatically stop a bank from taking possession of a property acquired through extrajudicial foreclosure after the borrower fails to redeem it within the period allowed by law.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, the SC Third Division denied the petition of spouses Anthony and Ma. Fatima An and upheld the writ of possession issued in favor of Philippine National Bank (PNB).
The couple had obtained a ₱2-million loan from Allied Banking Corporation, later acquired by PNB through a merger, using their property as collateral. After they defaulted, the bank foreclosed the mortgage and won the property at a public auction.
The spouses failed to redeem the property within the one-year redemption period. PNB subsequently consolidated ownership and sought a court order to take possession after the couple refused to vacate.
Although the Regional Trial Court issued the writ, it suspended its implementation pending the spouses’ appeal. The Court of Appeals reversed the suspension, a ruling affirmed by the SC.
The high court stressed that once ownership is consolidated in the purchaser’s name, the trial court has a ministerial duty to issue the writ of possession.
It also clarified that appeals and separate actions questioning the mortgage or foreclosure do not automatically suspend enforcement of the writ under Act No. 3135, as amended.
The ruling establishes that borrowers may pursue available legal remedies, but cannot use the mere filing of an appeal to prevent a lawful purchaser from taking possession of foreclosed property.
ia/xf
