GR 255212; (February, 2023) (Digest)
G.R. No. 255212 , February 20, 2023
EMMA C. VILLARETE, OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, CITY TREASURER OF CEBU; AND CITY OF CEBU, PETITIONERS, VS. ALTA VISTA GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, INC., RESPONDENT.
FACTS
On May 27, 2011, respondent Alta Vista Golf and Country Club, Inc. (Alta Vista) won the auction sale of a tax-delinquent property, Lot No. 4 PSU-192448, registered in the name of the Heirs of Benigno Sumagang. The City Treasurer of Cebu issued a Certificate of Sale to Alta Vista. The one-year redemption period was set to expire. On May 23, 2012, the City Treasurer advised the heirs, through Anita Sumagang, to redeem the property on or before May 28, 2012, and required documents proving her identity as an heir. On May 28, 2012, Anita tendered payment but it was refused by the City Treasurer’s office for failure to present the required proof of identity. On May 30, 2012, Anita returned with the required documents and was allowed to redeem the property, and a Certificate of Redemption was issued. Alta Vista demanded the cancellation of the Certificate of Redemption, arguing the redemption was made beyond the one-year period. The City Treasurer denied the demand. Alta Vista filed a Petition for Mandamus and Damages before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to compel the issuance of a final deed of conveyance and cancel the Certificate of Redemption. The RTC granted the petition, ruling the redemption period expired on May 26, 2012, and the payment on May 30, 2012, was invalid. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC but computed the redemption period to have expired on May 28, 2012 (May 27, 2012, being a Sunday), and found no valid tender of payment on May 28 due to the lack of required documents.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that mandamus was proper to compel the City Treasurer to issue a final deed of conveyance to Alta Vista and cancel the Certificate of Redemption issued to the heirs, despite the heirs’ attempt to redeem the property within the redemption period.
RULING
The Supreme Court GRANTED the Petition, REVERSED and SET ASIDE the CA Decision and Resolution, and DISMISSED the Petition for Mandamus and Damages. The Court held that the right of redemption under Section 261 of the Local Government Code is a substantive right that must be liberally construed in favor of the taxpayer. The Court found that Anita Sumagang, as an heir, made a valid tender of payment on the last day of redemption, May 28, 2012. The City Treasurer’s refusal to accept payment due to lack of proof of identity, despite Anita having the full redemption amount, was an unjustified impediment. The subsequent acceptance of payment and issuance of the Certificate of Redemption on May 30, 2012, related back to the date of the valid tender. Therefore, the redemption was effected within the statutory period. Consequently, the City Treasurer’s act of issuing the final deed of conveyance to Alta Vista was not a ministerial duty, as the property had been validly redeemed, making the writ of mandamus improper.