Northern Motors vs Sapinoso

7/17/2019 Northern Motors vs Sapinoso

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/northern-motors-vs-sapinoso 1/3

G.R. No. L-28074 May 29, 1970

NORTHERN MOTORS, INC., plaintif-appellant, vs.CASIANO SAPINOSO and "OHN !OE", deendants-appellees.

!OCTRINE: That the ultimate object of the action is the foreclosure of the chattel mortgage, is of no moment, for it is the fact of foreclosureand actual sale of the mortgaged chattel that bar further recovery bythe vendor of any balance on the purchaser's outstanding obligationnot satised by the sale.

ACTS#

Sapinoso purchased orm Northern Motors a car or P12,171, makin ado!n pa"ment and the #alance pa"a#le on installment. $o secure thepa"ment, Sapinoso e%ecuted chattle mortae on the car.

$he mortae contract provided that upon deault, the mortaeema":

&a'sell the car(&#'cancel the contract(&c' oreclose the propert" e%tra)udiciall"(&d'oreclose the propert" )udiciall"(&e'*le an ordinar" civil action or e%act ul*llment

urther, !hichever is the elected remed", the mortaor !aives hisriht to reim#ursement o an" amounts paid #" him.

Sapinoso ailed to pa" several installment dues. +is other pa"ments!ere applied almost all on the interest onl". ith this, Northern Motors*led this present complaint.

n the complaint, Northern Motors stated that it !as availin itsel othe remed" o e%tra)udicial oreclosure, !ith a pra"er or the issuanceo !rit o replevin upon *lin a #ond. Should the mortaor ailed todeliver the car, then it #e ordered to pa" the amount due plus 2/attorne"s ees.

Su#se0uent to the commencement o the action #ut #eore *lin anans!er, Sapinoso paid P1,2.

!rit o replevin !as issued and served to Sapinoso toether !ith thesummons. $he ne%t da", the sherif sei3ed the car and delivered toNorthern Motor.



Sapinoso made an ans!er, statin that he has alread" paid so muchor the car( and that the value o the car is onl" P,( and that thereason or not #ein a#le to pa" the installment dues is #ecause thecar is deective, and that Northern ailed to have it *%ed even thouhhe had repeatedl" called its attention. +e also avered that he ave

P7 to Northern to have the car *%ed, #ut instead, Northern *led theinstant suit. Sapinoso pra"ed that the car #e returned to him, and thathe is !illin to pa" or it in a compromise areement.

$he trial court *nds that Northern has the riht to the possession o thecar, and that the deliver" o the car to him is rati*ed. 4ut Northern hasto return the P1,2 to Sapinoso plus interest.

Northern made an appeal claimin that the court erred in orderin it toreturn the P1,2. 5nder rt 166 o the 8ivil 8ode, it is the e%erciseand not the election o remed" o oreclosure that #ars the creditor

rom recoverin the unpaid #alance o the de#t. Northern states thatSapinoso, in pa"in him #eore he *les his ans!er, and #" not *lin acounter-claim, efectivel" renounced an" riht he has to recover.

ISS$E: hether Northern has to return the P1,2 paid to him #"Sapinoso ater commencement o the present case #ut #eore the *lino Sapinoso9s ns!er.

HEL!: No o#liation to return.

$he trial court erred in concludin that the leal efects o the *lin o

the action !as to #ar the plaintif rom acceptin urther pa"ments onthe promissor" note.

$hat the ultimate o#)ect o the action is the oreclosure o the chattelmortae, is o no moment, or it is the act o oreclosure and actualsale o the mortaed chattel that #ar urther recover" #" the vendoro an" #alance on the purchasers outstandin o#liation not satis*ed#" the sale.

n an" event, !hat rticle 166&;' prohi#its is <urther action aainstthe purchaser to recover an" unpaid #alance o the price(< and

althouh this 8ourt has construed the !ord <action< in said rticle166 to mean <an" )udicial or e%tra)udicial proceedin #" virtue o!hich the vendor ma" la!ull" #e ena#led to e%act recover" o thesupposed unsatis*ed #alance o the purchase price rom the purchaseror his priv"<, there is no occasion at this stae to appl" the restrictiveprovision o the said article, #ecause there has not "et #een aoreclosure sale resultin in a de*cienc".



$he pa"ment o the sum o P1,2. #" deendant-appellee Sapinoso!as a voluntar" act on his part and did not result rom a <urtheraction< instituted #" plaintif-appellant.

!ISPOSITI%E: $he )udment appealed rom is modi*ed #" settin

aside the portion thereo !hich orders Northern Motors to pa" Sapinosothe sum o P1,2..

Documents

Northern Motors vs Sapinoso