This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-06-26 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| However, our ruling in Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company v. Tan,[9] promulgated on 30 November 2006, set aside the ruling of the appellate court in CA G.R. CV No. 70742 and dismissed Civil Case No. 98-225. We ruled that the respondents in that case failed to prove that the property in issue is conjugal. Moreover, we found that the debit memos represented payment only in the bank's book of entries but did not actually involve the payment or settlement of the original obligation. We thus declared that the extrajudicial foreclosure and subsequent sale of the mortgaged property covered by the title in question are valid. Our ruling in G.R. No. 163712 knocks off a leg from respondents' theory that the issuance of a writ of possession upon a property is dependent upon the validity of the mortgage. | |||||