Mae Jansen Case Digest 2020.
Mae Jansen Case Digest 2020.
Mae Jansen Case Digest 2020.
PAGLAS
Facts:
336 square meter residential lot and a house standing thereon located at No.
property in favor of a certain Charlie Yap (Yap) and that the same was already
foreclosed with Yap as the purchaser of the disputed... lot in an extra- judicial
foreclosure sale which was registered on February 22, 2000. Yap's brother later
respondent bought the subject property... from Yap for P950,000.00. A Deed of
However, it was made clear in the said Deed that the property was still subject
Prior to respondent's purchase of the subject property, petitioner filed a suit for
the declaration of nullity of the mortgage in favor of Yap as well as the sheriff's
provisional certificate of sale which was issued after the disputed house and lot
petitioner filed with the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), Davao City, a
the RTC
AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION.
Aggrieved by the Decision of the RTC, petitioner filed a petition for review with
the CA.
Issues:
LAWS AND
JURISPRUDENCE.
Ruling:
In the instant case, pending final resolution of the suit filed by petitioner for
the declaration of nullity of the real estate mortgage in favor of Yap, the MTCC,
the RTC and the CA were unanimous in sustaining the presumption of validity
of the real estate mortgage over the... subject property in favor of Yap as well as
and the... subsequent foreclosure sale, the MTCC, the RTC and the CA also
Yap. The Court finds no cogent reason to depart from these rulings of the
MTCC, RTC and CA. Thus, for purposes of resolving the issue as... to who
thereof after the expiration or termination of his right to hold possession under
right to possess; hence, the issue of rightful possession is decisive for, in such
action, the defendant is in actual possession and the plaintiff's cause of action
a tenant is estopped from denying is the title of his landlord at the time of the
that relation, the presumption will not apply.[14] Hence, the tenant may show
that the landlord's title has expired or been conveyed to another or himself;
and he is not estopped to deny a claim for rent, if he has been... ousted or
claiming is her supposed title to the subject property which she acquired
and petitioner. Hence, the... presumption under Section 2 (b), Rule 131 of the
petitioner's claim for rent, her basis for such denial, which is her subsequent
INTERNAL REVENUE
FACTS: The Monetary Board of the BSP prohibited the Rural Bank of Tuba
(Benguet), Inc. (RBTI) from doing business in the Philippines, placed it under
clearance from the BIR before the project of distribution of the assets of the
RULING: NO. Section 52(C) of the Tax Code of 1997 is not applicable to banks
ordered placed under liquidation by the Monetary Board, and a tax clearance is
Thus, this Court has held that the RTC, acting as liquidation court under
Section 30 of the New Central Bank Act, commits grave abuse of discretion in
Board, to first secure a tax clearance from the appropriate BIR Regional Office,
and holding in abeyance the approval of the project of distribution of the assets
of the closed bank by virtue thereof. Three reasons have been given.
First, Section 52(C) of the Tax Code of 1997 pertains only to a regulation of the
relationship between the SEC and the BIR with respect to corporations
case governed by the special rules and procedures provided under Section 30
of the New Central Bank Act, which does not require that a tax clearance be
Second, only a final tax return is required to satisfy the interest of the BIR in
the liquidation of a closed bank, which is the determination of the tax liabilities
unreasonable for the liquidation court to require that a tax clearance be first
under liquidation.
To our mind, what the BIR should have requested from the RTC, and what was
within the discretion of the RTC to grant, is not an order for PDIC, as liquidator
of RBBI, to secure a tax clearance; but, rather, for it to submit the final return
of RBBI. The first paragraph of Section 30(C) of the Tax Code of 1997, read in
conjunction with Section 54 of the same Code, clearly imposes upon PDIC, as
the receiver and liquidator of RBBI, the duty to file such a return.
The filing by PDIC of a final tax return, on behalf of RBBI, should already
address the supposed concern of the BIR and would already enable the latter
approval by the RTC of the Project of Distribution of the assets of the RBBI
The BIR can only issue a certificate of tax clearance when the taxpayer had
completely paid off his tax liabilities. The certificate of tax clearance attests
that the taxpayer no longer has any outstanding tax obligations to the
Government.
Should the BIR find that RBBI still had outstanding tax liabilities, PDIC will
not be able to pay the same because the Project of Distribution of the assets of
RBBI remains unapproved by the RTC; and, if RBBI still had outstanding tax
liabilities, the BIR will not issue a tax clearance; but, without the tax clearance,
the Project of Distribution of assets, which allocates the payment for the tax
dilemma.
Third, it is not for this Court to fill in any gap, whether perceived or evident, in
current statutes and regulations as to the relations among the BIR, as tax
collector of the National Government; the BSP, as regulator of the banks; and
the PDIC, as the receiver and liquidator of banks ordered closed by the BSP. It
There is another reason. The position of the BIR, insisting on prior compliance
with the tax clearance requirement as a condition for the approval of the
both the letter and intent of the law on liquidation of banks by the PDIC.
The law expressly provides that debts and liabilities of the bank under
preference of credit under the Civil Code. Duties, taxes, and fees due the
Government enjoy priority only when they are with reference to a specific
property, under Article 2242(1) of the same Code. However, with reference to
the other real and personal property of the debtor, sometimes referred to as
"free property," the taxes and assessments due the National Government, other
than those in Articles 2241(1) and 2242(1) of the Civil Code, such as the
corporate income tax, will come only in ninth place in the order of preference.
On the other hand, if the BIR’s contention that a tax clearance be secured first
before the project of distribution of the assets of a bank under liquidation may
be approved, then the tax liabilities will be given absolute preference in all
instances, including those that do not fall under Articles 2241(1) and 2242(1)
of the Civil Code. In order to secure a tax clearance which will serve as proof
that the taxpayer had completely paid off his tax liabilities, PDIC will be
compelled to settle and pay first all tax liabilities and deficiencies of the bank,
regardless of the order of preference under the pertinent provisions of the Civil
Code. Following the BIR’s stance, therefore, only then may the project of
distribution of the bank’s assets be approved and the other debts and claims
thereafter settled, even though under Article 2244 of the Civil Code such debts
and claims enjoy preference over taxes and assessments due the National
Government. The BIR effectively wants this Court to ignore Section 30 of the
New Central Bank Act and disregard Article 2244 of the Civil Code. However, as
a court of law, this Court has the solemn duty to apply the law. It cannot and
Facts:
Petition for review on certiorari. Spouses Ignacio F. Juico and Alice P. Juico
Quezon City. When petitioners failed to pay the monthly amortizations due,
accrued monthly interests. The amount due on the two promissory notes
attorney's fees. On the same day, the mortgaged property was sold at public
petitioners received[8] a demand letter dated May 2, 2001 from respondent for
collection suit in the trial court. In their Answer, petitioners admitted the
existence of the debt but interposed, by way of special and affirmative defense,
that the complaint states no cause of action considering that the principal of
the loan was already paid when the mortgaged... property was extrajudicially
rate changes every month based on the prevailing market rate and she notified
petitioners of the prevailing rate by calling them monthly before their account
becomes past due. When asked if there was any... written authority from
answered that petitioners signed a promissory note indicating that they agreed
Petitioner Ignacio F. Juico testified that prior to the release of the loan, he was
required to sign a blank promissory note and was informed that the interest
It ruled that the amount realized at the auction sale was applied to the interest,
conformably with Article 1253 of the Civil Code which provides that if the debt
produces interest,... payment of the principal shall not be deemed to have been
The trial court further held that Ignacio's claim that he signed the promissory
notes in blank cannot negate or mitigate his liability since he admitted reading
When the case was elevated to the CA, the latter affirmed the trial court's
decision.
Issues:
whether the interest rates imposed upon them by respondent are valid.
They insist that the interest rates... were unilaterally imposed by the bank and
thus violate the principle of mutuality of contracts. They argue that the
escalation clause in the promissory notes does not give respondent the
unbridled authority to increase the interest rate unilaterally. Any change must
Ruling:
decrease or otherwise change from time to time the rate of interest and/or
bank charges "without advance notice" to petitioner, "in the event of change in
the interest rate... prescribed by law or the Monetary Board of the Central
Bank of the Philippines," does not give respondent bank unrestrained freedom
to charge any rate other than that which was agreed upon. Here, the monthly
lthough interest rates are no longer subject to a ceiling, the lender still does not
have an unbridled license to impose increased interest rates. The lender and
the borrower should agree on the imposed rate, and such imposed rate should
be in... writing.
In this case, the trial and appellate courts, in upholding the validity of the
escalation clause, underscored the fact that there was actually no fixed rate of
Here, the escalation clause in the promissory notes authorizing the respondent
to adjust the rate of interest on the basis of a law or regulation issued by the
Central Bank of the Philippines, should be read together with the statement
after the first paragraph where no rate of... interest was fixed as it would be
There is no indication that petitioners were coerced into agreeing with the
written consent.
P. Juico are hereby ORDERED to pay jointly and severally respondent China
INC
On December 8, 2009, Gonzales filed an ex parte
order of court dated February 26, 2010 was served to
possession on the ground that he is the adverse
claimant who is a third party and stranger to the
settlement of the estate of his father as well as
waiver by them of their shares in favor of their
mother. For this very reason, he cannot be permitted to
Corporations, entered into a Credit Agreement with PNB for the availment of an
After the Extrajudicial Sale, the properties were awarded to PNB as the sole
bidder, and the bid amount was applied in partial satisfaction of the
outstanding obligation of the borrowers. NLC filed an action for injunction with
arguing, inter alia, that PNB’s right to bring a mortgage action had already
prescribed.
The RTC granted NLC’s application for the issuance of a TRO, preventing PNB
The RTC denied NLC’s prayer for injunctive relief, ruling that the mortgage
Aggrieved, NLC elevated the case to the CA via a petition for certiorari under
Rule 65. The CA dismissed the petition outright for failure of NLC to file a
non to certiorari.
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may
file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and
such tribunal, board or officer, and granting such incidental reliefs as law and
be able to show, among others, that he does not have any other “plain, speedy
and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.” This remedy referred to in
Well established is the rule that the filing of a motion for reconsideration is a
prerequisite to the filing of a special civil action for certiorari, subject to certain
exceptions, to wit:
(a) where the order is a patent nullity, as where the court a quo has no
jurisdiction;
(b) where the questions raised in the certiorari proceeding have been duly
raised and passed upon by the lower court, or are the same as those raised
(c) where there is an urgent necessity for the resolution of the question and any
further delay would prejudice the interests of the government or the petitioner
useless;
(e) where petitioner was deprived of due process and there is extreme urgency
for relief;
(f) where, in a criminal case, relief from an order of arrest is urgent and the
(g) where the proceedings in the lower court are a nullity for lack of due
process;
(h) where the proceedings was ex parte or in which the petitioner had no
(i) where the issue raised is one purely of law or where public interest is
involved.22
petition for certiorari in a higher court, the attention of the lower court should
be first called to its supposed error and its correction should be sought. Failing
this, the petition for certiorari should be denied. The reason for this is to afford
the lower court the opportunity to correct any actual or fancied error attributed
to it through a re-examination of the legal and factual aspects of the case. The
petitioner’s disregard of this rule deprived the trial court the right and the
In the case at bench, the proper recourse of NLC was to have filed a motion for
reconsideration of the RTC Order denying its application for injunctive relief.
Only after the denial of such motion can it be deemed to have exhausted all
FEBRUARY 6, 2013
Facts:
with Philippine Asia Lending Investors, Inc. (PALII); he died before the
petitioner, and his... illegitimate family presented conflicting claims to PALII for
Asia: ITF (In Trust For) The Heirs of Joseph Goyanko, Sr." (ACCOUNT).
UCPB allowed PALII to withdraw One Million Five Hundred Thousand Pesos
UCPB refused the demand to restore the amount withdrawn plus legal interest
from December 11, 1997, the... petitioner filed a complaint before the RTC
UCPB admitted, among others, the opening of the ACCOUNT under the name
"ITF (In Trust For) The Heirs of Joseph Goyanko, Sr.," (ITF HEIRS) and the
In its August 27, 2003 decision, the RTC dismissed the petitioner's complaint
and awarded UCPB attorney's fees, litigation expenses and the costs of the sui
The RTC did not consider the words "ITF HEIRS" sufficient to charge UCPB
with knowledge... of any trust relation between PALII and Goyanko's heirs
(HEIRS)
Before the CA, the petitioner maintained that by opening the ACCOUNT, PALII
established a trust by which it was the "trustee" and the HEIRS are the
withdrawal.
The CA held that no express trust was created between the HEIRS and PALII.
For a trust to be... established, the law requires, among others, a competent
trustor and trustee and a clear intention to create a trust, which were absent
in this case
Quoting the RTC with approval, the CA noted that the contract of deposit was
UCPB, and the words "ITF HEIRS" were insufficient to establish the existence
of a trust.
The petitioner argues in his petition that: first, an express trust was created, as
clearly shown by PALII's March 28, 1996 and November 15, 1996 letters
definition... of a trust
PALII is clearly the trustor as it created the trust; UCPB is the trustee as it is
the party in whom confidence is reposed as regards the property for the benefit
of another; and the HEIRS are the beneficiaries as they are the persons for...
whose benefit the trust is created... the petitioner argues that the naming of
the cestui que trust is not necessary as it suffices... that they are adequately
certain or identifiable
Second, UCPB was negligent and in bad faith in allowing the withdrawal and in
failing to inquire into the nature of the ACCOUNT.[14] The petitioner maintains
that the surrounding facts, the testimony of UCPB's witness, and UCPB's own
records showed... that: (1) UCPB was aware of the trust relation between PALII
and the HEIRS; and (2) PALII held the ACCOUNT in a trust capacity.
Issues: The issue before us is whether UCPB should be held liable for the
UCPB, in favor of the HEIRS, when PALII opened the ACCOUNT with UCPB.
Ruling:
No express trust exists; UCPB exercised the required diligence in handling the
Under these standards, we hold that no express trust was created. First, while
ACCOUNT, was never under... any equitable duty to deal with or given any
power of administration over it. On the contrary, it was PALII that undertook
the duty to hold the title to the ACCOUNT for the benefit of the HEIRS. Third,
PALII, as the trustor, did not have the right to the... beneficial enjoyment of the
was not shown with reasonable certainty. While we agree with the petitioner
that a trust's beneficiaries need not be particularly identified for a trust to...
exist, the intention to create an express trust must first be firmly established,
along with the other elements laid above; absent these, no express trust exists.
Contrary to the petitioner's contention, PALII's letters and UCPB's records
investment
In the March 28, 1996 letter, PALII manifested its intention to pursue an active
the November 15, 1996 letter, PALII begged the petitioner to trust it with the
Had it been PALII's intention to... create a trust in favor of the HEIRS, it would
have relinquished any right or claim over the proceeds in UCPB's favor as the
UCPB's records and the testimony of UCPB's witness... likewise lead us to the
same conclusion. While the words "ITF HEIRS" may have created the
impression that a trust account was created, a closer scrutiny reveals that it is
We give credence to UCPB's explanation that the word "ITF" was merely used to
distinguish the ACCOUNT from PALII's other accounts with UCPB. A trust can
be created without using the word "trust" or "trustee," but the mere use of...
UCPB did not become a trustee by the mere opening of the ACCOUNT. While
this may seem to be the case, by reason of the fiduciary nature of the bank's
relationship with its depositor... this fiduciary... relationship does not "convert
the contract between the bank and its depositors from a simple loan to a trust
Since the records and the petitioner's own admission showed that the
ACCOUNT was opened by PALII, UCPB's receipt of the deposit signified that it
agreed to pay PALII upon its demand and only upon its order. Thus, when
UCPB allowed PALII to withdraw from the ACCOUNT, it was... merely
In these lights, we find the third assignment of error mooted. A cause of action
requires that there be a right existing in favor of the plaintiff, the defendant's
depositor. While the HEIRS may have a valid claim over the proceeds of the
CORPORATION
January 9, 2013
FACTS:
land. Pridisons executed in favor of PBComm a deed of real estate mortgage over
the land and the improvements existing or to be erected thereon to secure the
loan it acquired from the bank. The deed of real estate mortgage was registered
and annotated on Pridisons title on the same day it was executed. Pridisons
thereafter transferred all its rights over the land to its sister company, Ivory Crest
Ivory Crest then applied for permits and licenses to construct and sell
condominium units on the land with the Housing and Land Use Regulatory
Board (HLURB). The HLURB issued the certificate of registration and the license
Bormacheco, Inc., Nazario F. Santos, Teresita Chua Tek, Charito Ong Lee, and
preliminary injunction issued by the HLURB in conjunction with the action for
ISSUES:
HELD: The petition lacks merit. CIVIL LAW: Condominium and Subdivision
Decree) to protect innocent lot buyers from scheming developers. For this reason,
the Court has broadly construed the jurisdiction of the HLURB to include
The Court thus upholds the HLURBs jurisdiction over the action to annul the
Second Issue: The Court, in general, agrees with PBComms allegation that
circumstances show that PBComm was aware of the proposed conversion of the
PD No. 957 to the case. Prior execution of the mortgage alone does not discount
the possibility that PBComm may have had foreknowledge and possible
complicity in the development plans of the condominium project; the factual
findings of HLURB, as affirmed by both the OP and the CA, indicate that this was
Facts: Spouses Quirino V. Dela Cruz and Gloria Dela Cruz, petitioners herein,
Aliaga, Nueva Ecija engaged in the distribution and sale of fertilizers and
agricultural chemical products, among others. At the time material to the case,
Quirino, a lawyer, was the Municipal Mayor of Aliaga, Nueva Ecija. On March
23, 1978, Gloria applied for and was granted by respondent Planters Products,
Inc. (PPI) a regular credit line of P200,000.00 for a 60-day term, with trust
support of her credit application for participation in the Special Credit Scheme
(SCS) of PPI. On August 28, 1978, Gloria signed in the presence of the PPI
agricultural chemicals) she received “upon the trust” of PPI. Gloria thereby
Issue: Whether or not Gloria can be held liable on the basis of the signed Trust
receipt/SCS.
participants” in her favor, which, in turn, she would assign “in favor of PPI with
recourse confirms the obligation of a general indorser, who has the same
liability as the original obligor. As the assignor “with recourse” of the Trust
made herself directly liable to PPI for the value of the inputs delivered to the
in the demand letters Gloria sent to the farmer-participants only indicated that
The petitioners could not validly justify the non-compliance by Gloria with her
obligations under the Trust Receipt/SCS by citing the loss of the farm outputs
due to typhoon Kading. There is no question that she had expressly agreed that
crops. The use of the term with recourse was, in fact, consonant with the
provision of the Trust Receipt/SCS stating that if Gloria could not deliver or
serve “all the inputs” to the farmer-participants within 60 days, she agreed that
“the undelivered inputs will be charged” to her “regular credit line.” Under her
arrangement with PPI, the trust receipts were mere securities for the credit line
granted by PPI, having in fact indicated in her application for the credit line
executed a Real Estate Mortgage in favor of Equitable PCI Bank over three
parcels of land. The mortgage secured the Two Million Pesos (P2,000,000.00)
that the 1-year period of redemption under Act 3135 should apply, and not the
The RTC dismissed the action of the petitioner ruling that redemption was
made belatedly and that there was no redemption made at all. The CA affirmed
Issue: Whether or not the redemption period should be the 1-year period
provided under Act 3135, and not the shorter period under RA 8791 as the
3135.
The one-year period of redemption is counted from the date of the registration
of the certificate of sale. In this case, the parties provided in their real estate
mortgage contract that upon petitioner’s default and the latter’s entire loan
Amending Act no. 3135 is Sec 47 of RA 8791, which stated an exception made
in the case of juridical persons which are allowed to exercise the right of
redemption only “until, but not after, the registration of the certificate of
foreclosure sale” and in no case more than three (3) months after foreclosure,
persons whose properties were foreclosed and sold in accordance with the
prescribed by the statute, and within the prescribed time limit, to make it
effective.
Furthermore, the freedom to contract is not absolute; all contracts and all
rights are subject to the police power of the State and not only may regulations
which affect them be established by the State, but all such regulations must be
FACTS:
Spouses Roberto and Aida Amurao (Sps. Amurao) entered into a Construction
Corporation (Intra Strata). Aegean failed to comply with its obligation. Hence,
the spouses filed a complaint before the RTC to enforce its claim against the
sureties.
During the pre-trial, Manila Insurance and Intra Strata discovered that the
Dismiss on the grounds of lack of cause of action and lack of jurisdiction. The
petition.
Hence, Manila Insurance elevated the matter to the Supreme Court.
Manila Insurance argues that it cannot be held liable as a surety because the
dispute between the spouses and Aegean should be brought first before the
ISSUES:
II. Whether or not the RTC has jurisdiction over the dispute?
HELD:
the surety, guarantees the performance by another party, called the principal
obligee.
The Court has consistently held that a surety’s liability is joint and several,
limited to the amount of the bond, and determined strictly by the terms of
and the obligee.It bears stressing, however, that although the contract of
obligee is nevertheless direct, primary, and absolute. But while there is a cause
of action against Manila Insurance, the complaint must still be dismissed for
lack of jurisdiction.
SECOND ISSUE: The CIAC has jurisdiction over the case and not the RTC.
In order for the CIAC to acquire jurisdiction two requisites must concur: “first,
second, the parties must have agreed to submit the dispute to arbitration
mortgage with damages against FEBTC and Raul Obispo, alleging that
Fairview Branch, over their property in Quezon City. The Spouses entrusted
of ₱250,000.00.
Obispo initially gave them ₱100,000.00 and the balance was given a few
months later. After supposedly completing payment of their loan, the Spouses
demanded the release of their title but Obispo refused to talk or see them, as
he is now hiding from them. Upon verification with the Registry of Deeds of
Quezon City, Spouses Ramos said they were surprised to learn that their
property was in fact mortgaged for ₱1,159,096.00 and that Obispo had instead
Because of the alleged fraud committed upon them by Obispo who made them
sign the REM form in blank, petitioners sought to have the REM annulled and
their title over the mortgaged property released by FEBTC. They claimed it was
Obispo who filled up the REM form contrary to their instructions and faulted
FEBTC for being negligent in not ascertaining the authority of Obispo and
words, Spouses Ramos contend that since their consent to the REM was
vitiated, judicial declaration of its nullity is in order. The RTC granted relief to
petitioners while the CA found the subject REM as a valid third- party or
Obispo? (YES)
2085 of the Civil Code which provides that "[t]hird persons who are not parties
to the principal obligation may secure the latter by pledging or mortgaging their
such.
apprised beforehand of the entire amount of the loan nor should it first be
determined before the execution of the Special Power of Attorney in favor of the
debtor. This is especially true when the words used by the parties indicate that
Here, Spouses Ramos as owners signed the REM as mortgagors and there is no
Ramos are not contracting parties whom the law considers ignorant or
legal presumption that a person takes ordinary care of his concerns. Hence, it
can be reasonably inferred from the facts on record that it was more probable
collateral so as to avail of his existing credit line with FEBTC instead of them
With the dearth of evidence to back up Spouses Ramos’ story, the CA found
implausible the alleged legal infirmities in the execution of the REM. The
the loan from FEBTC, and not to secure the loans obtained by Obispo himself,
they failed to present any evidence, except for their bare assertion, that
they indeed gave their title to Obispo purportedly to facilitate their loan with
Spouses Ramos became parties to the principal obligation and as such, the
record, however, reveals that they received the said amount not from FEBTC
but from Obispo. It could be inferred that the ₱250,000.00 given by Obispo to
Spouses Ramos was some form of remuneration in lending their title to him as
From all indications, the failure of Obispo to pay his loan resulted to the
prejudice of Spouses Ramos which may have led them to disown the Real
court’s decision which declared the REM as void and awarded damages to the
Spouses.
Facts:
In November 1998, Poblete decided to sell Lot No. 29 to pay her loan. She
Poblete, Maniego agreed to buy Lot No. 29 for P900,000.00, but Maniego
suggested that a deed of absolute sale for P300,000.00 be executed instead to
reduce the taxes. Thus, Poblete executed the Deed of Absolute Sale dated 9
with Land Bank, using OCT No. P-12026 as collateral. Land Bank alleged that
as a condition for the approval of the loan, the title of the collateral should first
be transferred to Maniego.
name.
Agreement and a Real Estate Mortgage over TCT No. T-20151. On the same
Subsequently, Maniego failed to pay the loan with Land Bank. On 4 November
Issues:
Ruling:
fraudulent deed is a nullity and conveys no title.[17] Moreover, where the deed
of sale states that the purchase price has been paid but in fact has never been
Since TCT No. T-20151 has been declared void by final judgment, the Real
Land Bank insists that it is a mortgagee in good faith since it verified Maniego's
title, did a credit investigation, and inspected Lot No. 29. The issue of being a
petition.
This is the doctrine of "the mortgagee in good faith" based on the rule that
Title are not required to go beyond what appears on the face of the title
However, it has been... consistently held that this rule does not apply to banks,
assume that, simply because the title offered as security is on its face free of
steps to verify the... title and inspect the properties to be mortgaged. Applying
the same principles, we do not find Land Bank to be a mortgagee in good faith.