G.R. No. 244017 , August 30, 2023
ROSALIA T. CABALLERO, PETITIONER, VS. LAVERNE REALTY & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, VIVIAN P. RAZOTE, TREASURER OF LAS PIÑAS CITY AND REGISTRAR OF DEEDS OF LAS PIÑAS CITY, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Respondent Vivian P. Razote was the registered owner of a parcel of land in Las Piñas City. In December 2011, the City Treasurer sent Razote a Final Demand Letter for real property tax delinquencies from 2009 to 2011. A Notice of Levy was issued on January 7, 2012, and annotated on the title. A tax delinquency sale was held on February 27, 2012, where respondent Laverne Realty & Development Corporation was declared the winning bidder. A Certificate of Sale was issued and annotated. The City Treasurer sent Razote letters reminding her of the redemption period, which expired on February 27, 2013. A Notice of Deed of Conveyance was issued on March 7, 2013, and a Deed of Conveyance was executed in favor of Laverne on January 16, 2014.
Petitioner Rosalia T. Caballero filed a Complaint for nullification of the tax delinquency sale, claiming she purchased the property from Razote in 2008 under an unnotarized Deed of Absolute Sale, which she failed to register. She argued the sale was invalid because she was deprived of her right to participate, as the Notice of Levy was not received by her or Razote, and notices regarding the redemption were served only on the property developer. She also claimed Laverne was unjustly enriched. Caballero deposited the required amount with the court under Section 267 of the Local Government Code.
The City Treasurer argued the sale to Caballero was not binding as it was unnotarized, unregistered, and unknown to it, and that Caballero failed to redeem. Laverne invoked the presumption of regularity in the City Treasurer’s actions and argued the sale became final after no redemption. The Regional Trial Court dismissed the Complaint, finding Caballero negligent for not paying taxes and registering the sale, and that the City Treasurer could not notify her. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding Caballero failed to establish any invalidity and that the City Treasurer complied with notice requirements by sending letters to Razote’s last known address.

ISSUE

Whether or not the Court of Appeals was correct in affirming the dismissal of Caballero’s Complaint for nullification of the tax delinquency sale.

RULING

No. The Petition is meritorious. The Supreme Court ruled that Caballero has standing to question the tax delinquency sale as a person with legal interest whose substantive rights would be impaired. On the merits, the Court found the requirements for a valid tax delinquency sale under Section 258 of the Local Government Code were not complied with. The provision requires the warrant of levy to be mailed to or served upon the delinquent owner or person having legal interest therein. The Court held that service by registered mail is not complete upon mailing but upon actual receipt, and there was no proof Razote actually received the Notice of Levy. Furthermore, the City Treasurer failed to serve the notice on the administrator or occupant of the property, as the lot was vacant and within a developer’s control, making such service a mandatory requirement when the owner cannot be located. Due to these defects in the notice requirements, the tax delinquency sale was declared invalid. The Court also noted that while Caballero was negligent in not registering her sale, this did not affect the invalidity of the tax sale proceedings, and her remedy was to seek reimbursement from Razote for the redemption amount she paid.