You're currently signed in as:
User

MANOLO P. CERNA v. CA

This case has been cited 1 times or more.

2015-09-02
PERALTA, J.
It must be emphasized that Bautista, who by now may have already turned 87 years old,[60] is considered as a third-party or accommodation mortgagor. She mortgaged her property to stand as security for the indebtedness of Liezel 's Garments, Inc. She is not a party to the principal obligation but merely secured the latter by mortgaging her own property. In fact, it was only Dolores E. Bautista, theh the President and General Manager of Liezel's Garments, Inc., who was the sole signatory of the Omnibus Credit Line Agreement dated August 16, 1994 and August 30, 1995[61] as well as the promissory note dated June 30, 1995 and September 30, 1995.[62] In Cerna v. Court of Appeals,[63] it was held: There is x x x no legal provision nor jurisprudence in our jurisdiction which makes a third person who secures the fulfillment of another's obligation by mortgaging his own property to be solidarily bound with the principal obligor. x x x. The signatory to the principal contract- loan - remains to be primarily bound. It is only upon the default of the latter that the creditor may have recourse on the mortgagors by foreclosing the mortgaged properties in lieu of an action for the recovery of the amount of the loan. And the liability of the third-party mortgagors extends only to the property mortgaged. Should there be any deficiency, the creditor has recourse on the principal debtor.[64]