This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2006-11-24 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| The records do not show that respondent ever obtained a certificate of title over the disputed property. [46] Nevertheless, the right of ownership of respondent's predecessors-in-interest had been recognized. As the purchaser of the property, respondent became the owner of the property and acquired the right to exercise all the attributes of ownership, including the right to possession (jus possidendi).[47] Respondent, who was in actual possession of the property before the writ of possession was implemented, possessed it as owner of the property. It can thus rightfully assert its right of possession which is among the bundle of rights enjoyed by an owner of a property under Art. 428 of the New Civil Code.[48] | |||||
|
2003-08-15 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| As the purchaser of the properties in the extra-judicial foreclosure sale, the PNCB is entitled to a writ of possession therefor. The law on extra-judicial foreclosure of mortgage provides that a purchaser in an extra-judicial foreclosure sale may take possession of the foreclosed property even before the expiration of the redemption period, provided he furnishes the necessary bond. Possession of the property may be obtained by filing an ex parte motion with the regional trial court of the province or place where the property or part thereof is situated. Upon filing of the motion and the required bond, it becomes a ministerial duty of the court to order the issuance of a writ of possession in favor of the purchaser. After the expiration of the one-year period without redemption being effected by the property owner, the right of the purchaser to the possession of the foreclosed property becomes absolute. The basis of this right to possession is the purchaser's ownership of the property. Mere filing of an ex parte motion for the issuance of the writ of possession would suffice, and no bond is required.[14] In the case at bar, petitioner sufficiently established its right to the writ of possession. More specifically, it presented as documentary exhibits the Certificate of Sale,[15] the annotations thereof at the back of respondents' titles,[16] the Affidavit of Consolidation proving that respondents failed to redeem the properties within the one-year redemption period,[17] the titles issued in the name of petitioner,[18] and petitioner's demand on respondents to vacate the properties.[19] | |||||
|
2001-12-14 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| In Laureano v. Bormaheco, Inc.,[11] we held that:"After the expiration of the one-year period without redemption being effected by the property owner, the right of the purchaser to the possession of the foreclosed property becomes absolute. The basis of this right to possession is the purchaser's ownership of the property. Mere filing of an ex parte motion for the issuance of the writ of possession would suffice, and no bond is required." | |||||