Scribd
Upload
186 views2 pages

B11 Executive Digest - Central Visayas vs. Adlawan

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal's decision to dismiss the petitioner's second complaint. The petitioner had initially filed a replevin case against the respondents to recover possession of a dump truck used as collateral for a loan after the respondents defaulted. The trial court ruled in petitioner's favor. Petitioner then foreclosed on the chattel mortgage and sold the dump truck at public auction. Petitioner filed a second case seeking to collect the unpaid loan balance, but the trial courts dismissed it, citing res judicata since the principal issues had already been adjudicated in the first case. The Supreme Court held that based on the rules on res judicata, the second complaint was barred as it involved litigating the same thing and under the

Uploaded by

lyka timan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
186 views2 pages

B11 Executive Digest - Central Visayas vs. Adlawan

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal's decision to dismiss the petitioner's second complaint. The petitioner had initially filed a replevin case against the respondents to recover possession of a dump truck used as collateral for a loan after the respondents defaulted. The trial court ruled in petitioner's favor. Petitioner then foreclosed on the chattel mortgage and sold the dump truck at public auction. Petitioner filed a second case seeking to collect the unpaid loan balance, but the trial courts dismissed it, citing res judicata since the principal issues had already been adjudicated in the first case. The Supreme Court held that based on the rules on res judicata, the second complaint was barred as it involved litigating the same thing and under the

Uploaded by

lyka timan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

TIMAN, MERA LYKA A.

2018-80052

G.R. No. 212674, March 25, 2019

CENTRAL VISAYAS FINANCE CORPORATION, PETITIONER, v. SPOUSES ELIEZER * S.


ADLAWAN AND LEILA ADLAWAN, AND SPOUSES ELIEZER * ADLAWAN, SR. AND ELENA
ADLAWAN, RESPONDENTS.

DEL CASTILLO, J.:

Factual Antecedents

Respondents Eliezer and Leila Adlawan obtained a Php3,669,685.00 loan from petitioner Central
Visayas Finance Corporation covered by a Promissory Note, 5 Chattel Mortgage6 over a Komatsu
Highway Dump Truck, but failed to pay the loan, prompting petitioner to file an action against
respondents for replevin before Cebu Regional Trial Court, The trial court ruled in petitioner's favor,
and respondents were ordered to deliver possession of the dump truck to petitioner. Petitioner then
foreclosed on the chattel mortgage and caused the sale at public auction of the dump truck. Petitioner
commenced a second case before the RTC for collection of sum of money and/or deficiency
judgment relative to respondents' supposed unpaid balance on their loan. which petitioner claimed to
be at Php2,104,604.97 - less the value of dump truck - with damages. RTC dismissed the complaint
due to (a) res judicata; (b) violation of the rule against forum shopping; and (c) estoppel, pleaded by
the defendants in their answer 10 and for which they were preliminarily heard as if a motion to dismiss
had been filed. On appeal, the CA affirmed the decision of RTC.

Issues

WON the CA erred in affirming the decision of the RTC.

Held:

NO.

SEC. 49. Effect of judgments or final orders. - The effect of a judgment or final order rendered by a
court of the Philippines, having jurisdiction to pronounce the judgment or final order, may be as
follows:

(b) In other cases, the judgment or final order is, with respect to the matter directly adjudged
or as to any other matter that could have been raised in relation thereto, conclusive between
the parties and their successors in interest by title subsequent to the commencement of the
action or special proceeding, litigating for the same thing and under the same title and in the
same capacity; and

Replevin, broadly understood, is both a form of principal remedy and of a provisional relief. It may
refer either to the action itself, i.e., to regain the possession of personal chattels being wrongfully
detained from the plaintiff by another, or to the provisional remedy that would allow the plaintiff to
retain the thing during the pendency of the action and hold it pendente lite. The action is primarily
possessory in nature and generally determines nothing more than the right of possession. Replevin is
so usually described as a mixed action, being partly in rem and partly in personam — in rem insofar
as the recovery of specific property is concerned, and in personam as regards to damages involved.
As an action in rem, the gist of the replevin action is the right of the plaintiff to obtain possession of
specific personal property by reason of his being the owner or of his having a special interest therein.
Petitioner's complaint for replevin was doubtless a mixed action - in rem with respect to its
prayer for the recovery of the vessel, and in personam with respect to its claim for damages.
And it was, with respect to its alternative prayer, clearly one in personam.

Following paragraph (b) of Section 49, Rule 39 of the 1964 Rules of Court, now [Section] 47 of
Rule 39 of the present Rules, petitioner's second complaint is unquestionably barred by res
judicata.22 

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy