121 United Coconut Planters Bank, petitioner vs.

Christopher Lumbo and Milagros Lumbo,

respondents
G.R. No. 162757 / 11 December 2013

Topic: Real Mortgage

Facts: Respondents borrowed P12,000,000 from UCPB for which a real estate mortgage was executed
covering a parcel of land in Boracay and all the improvements thereon they owned and operated as
a beach resort known as Titay’s South Beach Resort. Upon default, UCPB foreclosed the mortgaged
land and thereafter, it emerged as the highest bidder. When the respondents failed to redeem the
property within the redemption period, the title over such property was consolidated in the name of
UCPB.

UCPB filed an ex parte petition for the issuance of a writ of possession to recover possession of the
property. The lower court granted the writ and directed the sheriff of the province of Aklan to place
UCPB in the actual possession of the property. The writ of possession was served to respondents with
a demand for them to vacate the property on or before 31 January 2002. Respondents filed an
application for a writ of preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order to prevent the
implementation of the writ of possession. Such was denied by the RTC which was reversed by the
Court of Appeals.

ISSUE: Whether or not the writ of possession should be rightfully issued to UCPB for failure of the
respondents to redeem the property.

RATIO/HOLDING:
Yes. A writ of possession may be issued in the following instances, namely: (1) land registration
proceedings; (2) judicial foreclosure, provided the debtor is in possession of the mortgaged property
and no third person had intervened; (3) extrajudicial foreclosure of a real estate mortgage pending
redemption; and (4) execution sales. On the third foregoing instance, the purchaser at the
foreclosure sale may apply ex parte with the RTC of the province or place where the property or any
part of it is situated to give the purchaser possession thereof during the redemption period, among
others.

The reckoning of the period of redemption by the mortgagor starts from the registration of the sale
in the Register of Deeds as provided under Sec. 28 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. If the redemption
expires without the mortgagor redeeming the foreclosed property, the title over the property
consolidates in the purchaser. The consolidation confirms the purchaser as the owner entitled to the
possession of the property without any need for him to file the bond. In this case, since the
respondents failed to redeem the property within the one-year redemption period, UCPB
consolidated the title over the property in its name. The issuance of a writ of possession to the
purchaser becomes a matter of right upon the consolidation of title in his name.

DISPOSITIVE: The petition is GRANTED.