CASE DIGEST: Spouses Castro vs. Spouses Se

G.R. No. 190122: January 10, 2011

SPOUSES ISAGANI AND DIOSDADA CASTRO Petitioners vs. SPOUSES REGINO SE and VIOLETA DELA CRUZ, SPOUSES EDUARDO and CHARITO PEREZ and MARCELINO TOLENTINO Respondents

CARPIO-MORALES, J.:


FACTS: Spouses Perez borrowed money from spouses Castro. The loan was secured by a Real Estate Mortgage. The spouses Perez were unable to settle the obligation, hence, the spouses Castro extrajudicially foreclosed on the mortgage. However, prior to the foreclosure of the mortgage, the Spouses Perez sold the mortgaged property to the spouses dela Cruz. The spouses Castro filed a complaint for damages against spouses dela Cruz and Perez. Subsequently, they asked for a writ of possession from a different court, which was granted to them. The spouses delaCruz obtained a writ of injunction to stop the execution of the writ of possession. The writ was granted as the court ruled that as possessors of the property, they have a right to be undisturbed in their possession. Spouses Castro sought a writ of Certiorari from the Court of Appeals, but was denied. They brought the matter to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE: Whether or not the spouses dela Cruz were entitled to the writ of injunction.

HELD: The petition is without merit.

Civil Law: The Civil Code specifically provides that possession under claim of ownership raises a disputable presumption of ownership. It also says that possessors have the right to enjoy possession undisturbed. Given that the spouses dela Cruz was in possession prior to the foreclosure, and that they bought the property, they have a clear right over the property.

Remedial Law: The issuance of the writ was proper. First, the spouses dela Cruz had a clear right over the property, which is about to be disturbed by the writ of possession. Second, if the writ of possession was permitted to be executed, then it will amount to the deprivation of property of the spouses dela Cruz without judicial intervention.

Popular Posts