Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

11th Judicial Region
Branch ___
General Santos City

EX-PARTE PETITION FOR

THE ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF
POSSESSION OF THE
PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY
OWNED BY JOSE A. SUIZO,
JR. and all persons claiming
rights under him.

MISC. CASE NO. ___________

HOME DEVELOPMENT
MUTUAL FUND (also known
as Pag IBIG Fund),
represented by its OIC -
Department Manager III,
ERNA B. TAGHAP, and MAY
ANNE M. BASTES,
Petitioners,
x----------------------------------x

PETITION
COME NOW, Petitioners Home Development Mutual
Fund (HDMF), also known as Pag-IBIG Fund, and May Anne
M. Bastes, through their respective counsels, and to this
Honorable Court, most respectfully states that:

1. Petitioner HOME DEVELOPMENT MUTUAL FUND

(HDMF, for brevity) is a government financial institution
organized and existing by virtue of Republic Act No. 9679, with
principal address at Petron Mega Plaza, 358 Sen. Gil Puyat
Avenue, Makati City. For purposes of the instant petition, it
may be served with notices and other court processes at the
following address:

Pag-IBIG Fund,
Davao Housing Hub Business Center
2nd floor Pryce Tower Condo,
J. P. Laurel Avenue,
Bajada, Davao City

Page 1 of 12
 2. Petitioner Pag-IBIG Fund is represented by Ms.
Erna B. Taghap, OIC - Department Manager III, Loans
Management and Recovery Department (LMRD), Davao
Housing Business Center. A copy of the Secretary’s Certificate
executed on 15 January 2021 authorizing managers to file and
litigate cases involving Pag-IBIG Fund, is hereto attached as
ANNEX “A”.

3. Co-Petitioner MAY ANNE M. BASTES (“MS.

BASTES”, for brevity) is Filipino of legal age, single and a
resident of (insert address), where she may be served with
notices and other court processes at the office address of her
counsel at the following address:

LAW OFFICE OF ATTY. DONNA ANN T. BALBOA

2/F Velasquez Building,
Velasquez Street cor. Pendatun Avenue,
Barangay Dadiangas North, General Santos City 9500

4. Respondent JOSE A. SUIZO, JR. (“MR. SUIZO, for

brevity) Filipino of legal age, married and presently residing at
the subject property Lot 15, Block 5, Agan Homes Gensan
Phase III, Barangay San Isidro, General Santos City, where
he may be served with notices and other court processes of the
Honorable Court.

5. All parties have the capacity to sue and be sued.

THE FACTS

6. To secure the payment of his housing loan for the

purchase of lot and house construction, Respondent JOSE A.
SUIZO, JR. mortgaged a parcel of land, including
improvements thereon, situated at Barangay San Isidro,
General Santos City, in favor of petitioner Pag-IBIG Fund,
which property is more particularly described as follows:

A parcel of land of Agan Homes Gensan

Phase III (Lot 15, Block 5 of the subdivision
plan, PSD-12-039110, being a portion of Lot
848-A-1 PSD-12-037081;

Containing an area of One Hundred

Eighteen (118) square meters, more or less.
Page 2 of 12
Copies of the Promissory Note with Loan and Mortgage
Agreement executed on 02 February 2008 and then TCT No. T-
120060 are attached hereof as ANNEX “B” and ANNEX “C”,
respectively.

7. Respondent Mr. Suizo, however, defaulted in his

housing loan account. Despite repeated demands to update
and pay his housing loan, he failed to do so. As such, Pag-
IBIG Fund was compelled to file a Petition for the Extrajudicial
Foreclosure over the real estate mortgage covered by then TCT
No. T-120060 registered in the name of JOSE A. SUIZO, JR. A
copy of the Petition for the Extrajudicial Foreclosure of Real
Estate Mortgage under Act 3135, as amended by Act 4118,
filed on 12 December 2011 is attached hereof as Annex D.

8. An order of foreclosure was issued and, the above-

described property was sold at a public auction in favor of the
mortgagee HDMF as the highest bidder.

9. The RTC – OCC & Ex-Officio Provicial Sheriff,

General Santos City, through Clerk of Court/Ex-Officio
Provincial Sheriff Atty. Marion Gay C. Mirabueno issued
Sheriff’s Certificate of Sale (SCOS) dated May 17, 2012, in
favor of herein petitioner Pag-IBIG Fund. A copy of the
Sheriff’s Certificate of Sale dated May 17, 2012 is attached
hereof as Annex E.

10. The said SCOS was filed and registered before the
Registry of Deeds for General Santos City, and the same was
annotated at the dorsal portion of then TCT No. T-120060 as
Entry No. 2013001287 dated 04 April 2013.

11. For failure of the respondent Mr. Suizo to redeem

the properties during the one (1)-year period, ownership of the
property was consolidated in the name of the herein petitioner
Pag-IBIG Fund by way of an Affidavit of Consolidation of
Ownership executed by Cesar Virgilio A. Labuguen on 02
June 2016, which is hereto attached as Annex F.

12. Accordingly, the above-described property was

registered in petitioner Pag-IBIG Fund’s name under TCT No.
147-2017003589, a certified copy of which is hereto attached
as Annex G.

Page 3 of 12
 13. Being part of HDMF’s acquired asset, the above-
described property was endorsed for immediate sale and
disposal in accordance to its existing rules and guidelines.

14. The co-petitioner Ms. Bastes, being the winning

bidder in the public auction sale held by HDMF, and petitioner
HDMF executed a Deed of Conditional Sale involving the
above-described property, in which the petitioner HDMF
SOLD, TRANSFERRED AND CONVEYED unto co-petitioner
Ms. Bastes ownership, rights and interest over the above-
described property. A copy of the Deed of Conditional Sale
executed on 27 April 2021 is hereto attached as Annex H.

15. Apart from the Deed of Conditional Sale, petitioner

Pag-IBIG Fund issued the following documents to co-petitioner
Ms. Bastes, to wit:

a. Notice of Conditional Approval of Sale dated 16

April 2021, hereto attached as Annex I;

b. Notice of Installment Due dated 28 April 2021,

hereto attached as Annex J;

c. Official Receipts evidencing payments of

processing fee and initial mortgage redemption
insurance, hereto attached as Annexes “K” to
“K-1”.

16. Under Section 7 of Act No. 3135, as amended, the

purchaser of a foreclosed property may petition the Regional
Trial Court of the place where the property is situated to order
that the mortgagee be placed in possession of the mortgaged
property, to wit:

Sec. 7. In any sale made under the

provisions of this Act, the purchaser may
petition the Court of First Instance of the
province or place where the property or any
part thereof is situated, to give him
possession thereof during the redemption
period, furnishing bond in an amount
equivalent to the use of the property for a
period of twelve months, to indemnify the
debtor in case it be shown that the sale was
made without violating the mortgage or
without complying with the requirements of
this Act. Such petition shall be made under
Page 4 of 12
 oath and filed in form of an ex parte motion
in the registration or cadastral proceedings
if the property is registered, or in special
proceedings in the case of property
registered under the Mortgage Law or
under section one hundred and ninety-four
of the Administrative Code, or of any other
real property encumbered with a mortgage
duly registered in the office of any register
of deeds in accordance with any existing
law, and in each case the clerk of the court
shall, upon the filing of such petition,
collect the fees specified in paragraph
eleven of section one hundred and fourteen
of Act Numbered Four hundred and ninety-
six, as amended by Act Numbered Twenty-
eight hundred and sixty-six, and the court
shall, upon approval of the bond, order that
a writ of possession issue, addressed to the
sheriff of the province in which the property
is situated, who shall execute said order
immediately

17. Co-petitioner Ms. Bastes, being the TRANSFEREE

AND VENDEE FOR VALUE of the above-described property, is
therefore legally subrogated to the rights of petitioner Pag-IBIG
Fund under the foreclosure proceedings, and like Pag-IBIG
Fund, is therefore entitled to a writ of possession.

18. The Supreme Court has ruled in the case of

Reynaldo L. Laureano Versus Bormaheco, Inc. And Edgardo C.
Cruz, G.R. No. 137619, February 6, 2001, that:

“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 mortgage9
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
Page 5 of 12
 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.

Instead of seeking the issuance of a writ of

possession, however, PNCB sold the two lots
to private respondent Bormaheco, Inc. By
virtue of the sale, Bormaheco became the new
owner of the lots, entitled to all rights and
interests its predecessor PNCB has therein,
including the right to a writ of possession.”

19. Likewise, it is jurisprudentially settled that the right

for the issuance of a writ of possession, even within the
redemption period, is strengthened all the more after the
expiration of the redemption period, and in the latter case, the
requirement of a bond is dispensed with, to wit:

“In the present case, the period of

redemption had already long lapsed with no
redemption having been made. In fact, the
titles to all the properties at the auction sale
were already transferred to and registered in
the name of GSIS. This being so, there is no
justifiable ground whatsoever why the writ
of possession would not be issued. In the
case of JFC Leasing and Assistance Corp.
vs. Nena 19 SCRA 181, we ruled: Moreover,
if under Section 7 of Act 3135, the court has
the power on the ex parte application of the
purchaser to issue a writ of possession
during the redemption period, there is no
reason why it should not also have the same
power after the expiration of the period,
especially where, as in this case, a new title
has been issued in the name of the
purchaser.” (GSIS vs. Court of Appeals, 145
SCRA 341, 342)
Page 6 of 12
 “In fact, under Section 7 of Act 3135, the
purchaser is entitled to have the possession
of the property during the redemption
period, provided that a proper motion has
been filed, a bond approved, and no third
person is involved. Considering the present
case that the period for redemption had
already lapsed with no redemption having
been made, there is no justifiable ground
why the writ of possession would not be
issued.” (Banco Filipino Savings and
Mortgage Bank vs. Intermediate Appellate
Court, 142 SCRA 44).

“The issuance of a writ of possession to a

purchaser at a public auction is a
ministerial act. After the consolidation of
title in the buyer’s name for failure of the
mortgagor to redeem the property, the writ
of possession becomes a matter of right. Its
issuance to a purchaser in an extrajudicial
foreclosure sale is a merely ministerial
function.” (Mallari vs. Banco Filipino
Savings and Mortgage Bank, G.R No.
157660, August 29, 2008)

20. As in the Laureano, GSIS and Banco Filipino cases,

the period of redemption in the instant case had long since
expired. Consequently, petitioner HDMF and co-petitioner Ms.
Bastes, as purchaser and transferee, respectively, are now
entitled to the possession of the subject property as a matter
of right without the need of posting a bond and solely by
reason of the fact that co-petitioner is now the conditional
owner of the above-described property, and the issuance of a
writ of possession in favor of petitioners is a ministerial
function.

21. Co-petitioner Bastes had exhausted all non-litigious

means, including seeking intervention of the barangay
officials. However, respondent is clearly defiant. The barangay
Certification to File Action is hereto attached and marked as
Annex M.

22. The subject property is not involved in any pending

litigation and this is evidenced by a Certification dated

Page 7 of 12
__________________, which was issued by the RTC-OCC of
General Santos City, which is hereto attached as Annex N.

23. In conformity with law and jurisprudence, it is

imperative that a writ of possession be issued directing the
sheriff of the Honorable Court to place petitioners in
possession over the land and improvements thereon at
___________________________, and to cause the eviction of
respondent Mr. Suizo and all persons claiming rights under
him.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most

respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that an Order be
rendered:

1. Granting petitioners a Writ of Possession over the

property now covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. TCT
No. 147-2017003589 together with the improvements thereon;
and

2. Ordering the Sheriff or any of his/her duly

authorized deputies to oust Mr. Suizo and all persons claiming
rights under her on said property with the assistance of
appropriate peace officers, if necessary, and employing such
means as may be reasonably necessary to retake possession
and to immediately place petitioners in possession.

Other reliefs and remedies just and equitable under the

premises are likewise prayed for.

Davao City, Philippines. ________________ 2021.

HOME DEVELOPMENT MUTUAL FUND

Office of the Legal & General Counsel Group
Legal Department
th
29 Floor, Petron Mega Plaza Building
358 Sen. Gil J. Puyat Avenue, Makati City
Tel. No. 822-1597
Fax No. 822-1147

ROBERT JOHN S. COSICO

OIC-Deputy Chief Executive Officer – Chief Legal Counsel
Roll No. 46029
Lifetime IBP No. 645095
Page 8 of 12
 MCLE Compliance No. VI-0003906/November 06, 2017

MARCIAL C. PIMENTEL, JR.

Vice President – Legal & General Counsel Group
Roll No. 45234
Lifetime IBP No. 06090
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0003875/November 06, 2017

HEIDILIZA G. DALANAO
Attorney V
Legal and General Counsel Group
Roll No. 57179
Lifetime IBP No. 09295
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0003905/November 06, 2017

ALAN V. BADIOLA
Attorney IV – Legal and General Counsel Group
Roll No. 56057
IBP No. 1087105 / 01-03-20 / Albay Chapter
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0003882 / November 06, 2017
2/F HTCDC Bldg., B. Imperial St. Legazpi City

LUDY ROSE D. MARCELO

Attorney IV – Legal and General Counsel Group
Pag-IBIG Fund- Davao Housing Hub Business Center
2/F Pryce Tower Condo, JP Laurel Ave., Bajada, Davao City
Roll No. 67321
IBP No. 107375 / 01/10/2020/ Davao City
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0012501, Valid Until April 14, 2022
Mobile Number: 09189305304

ATTY. _________________________
Counsel for Co-Petitioner Ms. May Anne M. Bastes
__________________________
_______________________

Page 9 of 12
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
DAVAO CITY )S.S.
x---------------------------------------x

VERIFICATION AND
CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, ERNA B. TAGHAP, of legal age, Filipino, and presently holding

the position of OIC Department Manager with address at Pag-IBIG Fund,
Davao Housing Hub Business Center, 2 nd Floor Pryce Tower Condo, J.P.
Laurel Avenue, Bajada, Davao City, after having been sworn to in
accordance with law, do hereby depose and state - that:

1. I am the duly authorized representative of Petitioner Home

Development Mutual Fund (HDMF), also known as Pag-IBIG Fund, in the
above-entitled case as evidenced by the Secretary’s Certificate which is
attached hereto as Annex “A”;

2. I caused the preparation of the foregoing EX-PARTE PETITION FOR

THE ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY
PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY JOSE M. SUIZO, JR. and all persons claiming
rights under her, and that I have read and understood the same and all
the allegations in the pleading are true and correct based on my personal
knowledge, or based on authentic documents;

3. The pleading is not filed to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or

needlessly increase the cost of litigation, and that the factual allegations
therein have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will
likewise have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for
discovery;

4. Pag-IBIG Fund has not commenced any action or filed any claim
involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency
and, to the best of my knowledge, no such other action or claim is
pending therein, and if there is such other pending action or claim, a
complete statement of the present status thereof;

5. If I should thereafter learn that, other than the Amended Petition

in this case, the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is
pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other
tribunal or agency, I shall report that fact within five (5) calendar days
therefrom to the court wherein my aforesaid complaint or initiatory
pleading has been filed.

In witness hereof, I hereunto affixed my signature this ________ at

Davao City.

ERNA B. TAGHAP
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me on __________ in

___________, Philippines, affiant exhibiting before me her competent
evidence of identity: ______________________.

Doc. No. _____;

Page 10 of 12
Page No. _____;
Book No._____;
Series of 2021.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
TAGUM CITY ……………………… )S.S.
x---------------------------------------x

VERIFICATION AND
CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, MS. _________________________, of legal age, Filipino, and a

resident of ___________________________, after having been sworn to in
accordance with law, do hereby depose and state - that:

1. I am the co-petitioner in the above-entitled case;

2. I caused the preparation of the foregoing EX-PARTE PETITION FOR

THE ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY
PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY _________________ and all persons claiming
rights under her, and that I have read and understood the same and all
the allegations in the pleading are true and correct based on my personal
knowledge, or based on authentic documents;

3. The pleading is not filed to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or

needlessly increase the cost of litigation, and that the factual allegations
therein have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will
likewise have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for
discovery;

4. I have not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the
same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the
best of my knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein,
and if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement
of the present status thereof;

5. If I should thereafter learn that, other than the Amended Petition

in this case, the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is
pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other
tribunal or agency, I shall report that fact within five (5) calendar days
therefrom to the court wherein my aforesaid complaint or initiatory
pleading has been filed.

In witness hereof, I hereunto affixed my signature this

________________ at ______________.

_______________________
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me on __________ in

___________, Philippines, affiant exhibiting before me his/her competent
evidence of identity: ______________________.

Doc. No. _____;

Page No. _____;

Page 11 of 12
Book No._____;
Series of 2021.

Page 12 of 12