G.R. No. 159615; February 9, 2011
SPOUSES VICTOR ONG and GRACE TIU ONG, Petitioners, vs. PREMIER DEVELOPMENT BANK, THE PROVINCIAL SHERIFF OF RIZAL GRACE S. BELVIS and DEPUTY SHERIFF VICTOR S. STA. ANA, Respondents.

FACTS

Spouses Victor and Grace Ong, acting for Kenlene Laboratories, Inc., obtained a loan from Premier Development Bank (PDB) secured by a real estate mortgage over their residential property. For failure to pay monthly amortizations, PDB initiated extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings under Act No. 3135. The Notice of Sheriff’s Sale was issued on May 19, 1993. A certificate of posting was issued on May 21, 1993, and an affidavit of publication by the editor of Alppa Times was issued on June 14, 1993. The public auction was held on July 22, 1993, and the property was sold to PDB. A certificate of sale was issued on July 27, 1993. PDB obtained a writ of possession on May 4, 1994. The Spouses Ong’s subsequent petition for prohibition and injunction before the Court of Appeals was dismissed, and their petition for review before the Supreme Court was dismissed with finality on November 9, 2000. On July 19, 1994, the Spouses Ong filed a separate complaint for annulment of the extrajudicial foreclosure before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), alleging non-compliance with the notice and publication requirements of Act No. 3135, specifically: (1) the sheriff failed to properly post the notice of sale; and (2) Alppa Times was not a newspaper of general circulation. They also alleged over-computation of interests and penalties. The RTC dismissed the complaint, finding no irregularities in the foreclosure proceedings and that the Spouses Ong failed to prove their allegations. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in toto.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the dismissal of the complaint for annulment of the extrajudicial foreclosure, specifically regarding the alleged defects in the posting of the notice of sale and the publication in Alppa Times, and the alleged over-computation of the loan obligation.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition and AFFIRMED the Court of Appeals decision. The Court held that the respondents complied with the notice and publication requirements under Act No. 3135. The affidavit of publication executed by the editor of Alppa Times was entitled to full faith and credit, and the Spouses Ong failed to present competent evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity in its execution. The certification from the Office of the Clerk of Court established that Alppa Times was duly accredited for publishing sheriff’s notices at the time of foreclosure. The Court also found that the primary objective of notice was satisfied through sufficient newspaper publication. Furthermore, the Spouses Ong failed to discharge their burden of proving non-compliance with the posting requirement; thus, the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty by the sheriff prevailed. Regarding the loan computation, the Court ruled that the Spouses Ong failed to prove any error, while PDB proved by preponderant evidence that the petitioners defaulted on their loan obligation. The foreclosure proceedings were therefore valid.