G.R. No. 166333 November 25, 2005
JOSE E. HONRADO, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. ROGELIO M. PIZARRO in his official capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Quezon City, Branch 222; THE CLERK OF COURT OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, as Ex-Officio Sheriff of the RTC of Quezon City; MR. NERY G. ROY, in his official capacity as Sheriff IV of the RTC of Quezon City; and PREMIUM AGRO-VET PRODUCTS, INC., Respondents.
FACTS
Premium Agro-Vet Products, Inc. filed a collection suit against Jose Honrado. After Honrado was declared in default, the RTC rendered a judgment ordering him to pay the debt. The judgment became final and executory. Premium moved for execution, and the sheriff levied on and sold at public auction a parcel of land registered in Honrado’s name. The Certificate of Sale was issued and annotated on the title. Honrado failed to redeem the property within the one-year period.
Subsequently, the RTC of Calamba City rendered a decision in a separate case declaring the levied property a family home. Only after this, and after the redemption period had lapsed, did Honrado file a motion in the collection case to declare the property exempt from execution under the Family Code, claiming it was constituted as a family home before the debt was incurred.
ISSUE
Whether the claim for exemption of the family home from execution was timely raised.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition, ruling that the claim for exemption was raised out of time. The Court emphasized that a claim for exemption from execution must be asserted seasonably. Applying Section 12, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, the Court held that such a claim must be made before the sale of the property on execution. The purpose of execution is to put an end to litigation, and the winning party must not be deprived of the fruits of a final judgment through belated claims.
Honrado’s failure to object at the time of the levy or at any time before the auction sale constituted a waiver. Allowing a claim after the sale and the expiration of the redemption period would render final execution sales nugatory and defeat the very objective of execution proceedings. The subsequent judicial declaration of the property as a family home did not retroactively invalidate the already-consummated execution sale, as the exemption was not timely invoked in the main case where execution was sought. Litigation must end, and final judgments must be respected.
