This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2012-11-28 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Also, this Court's ruling in Ramirez v. Court of Appeals[33] is relevant: The Court of Appeals unfortunately was not entirely correct since the PNB accepted the redemption price from the petitioner after the one (1) year period had expired. By accepting the redemption price after the statutory period for redemption had expired, PNB is considered to have waived the one (1) year period within which Ramirez could redeem the property. There is nothing in the law which prevents such a waiver. Allowing a redemption after the lapse of the statutory period, when the buyer at the foreclosure does not object but even consents to the redemption, will uphold the policy of the law recognized in such cases as Javellana v. Mirasol and Nuñez, and in the more recent case of Tibajia, et al. v. Honorable Court of Appeals, et al., which is to aid rather than defeat the right of redemption. Thus, there is no doubt that the redemption made by petitioner Ramirez is valid. x x x. (Emphasis supplied; citations omitted.) | |||||