Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
2A
FACTS: On July 2, 1976, a suit for damages was filed by Jose Franco against
Zacarias Cometa before the Court of First Instance. In said case, the Court of First
Instance awarded the damages prayed for by Franco amounting to P57,000.
Eventually, the judgment became final and a writ of execution was issued on March
9, 1978. Thereafter, the sheriff levied on execution three commercial lots of Cometa
and sold such lots in a public auction to Franco.
Herco realty and Agri Development Corporation filed with the Court of First Instance
an action to annul the levy on execution and sale at public auction of the commercial
lots because it contended that the ownership of the lots has been transferred to it by
Cometa before the levy on execution and sale at the public auction in favor of Franco
took place.
The trial court then ordered the register of Deeds to cancel the title of Cometa and
issue new titles in favor of Franco. Pursuant to the order of the trial court, Franco filed
with the Court of First Instance a motion for issuance of a writ of possession. Herca
Realty opposed the motion on the ground that there is pending before another CFI an
action for annulment of the levy and sale of the properties in question.
The trial court issued an order granting the writ of possession but when the same was
reconsidered, it ruled that the grant of a writ of possession was premature. The
Intermediate Appellate Court reversed the Court of First Instance and granted the writ
of possession.
RULING: No. The lower court should not have issued a writ of possession.
In the case at bar, the validity of the levy and sale of properties is directly put in another
case by the petitioners. The Supreme Court finds it an issue which requires
preemptive resolution. For if the responded acquired no interest in the property by
virtue of the levy and sale, then, he is not entitled to possession.