G.R. No. 6205 , September 14, 1911
LOPE TORRECAMPO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. BALBINO VITERO, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

On May 29, 1903, Estefanio Vargas Rojas mortgaged a parcel of land to Lope Torrecampo. Subsequently, Pedro Triunfo took possession of the land. Torrecampo claims Triunfo was his tenant, but Triunfo was not presented as a witness. In 1907, Balbino Vitero obtained a money judgment against Pedro Triunfo. Pursuant to an execution on that judgment, the subject land was attached and sold at public auction to Vitero in August 1908. In April 1908, prior to the sale, Torrecampo had already filed an action before the justice of the peace to recover possession of the same land from Vitero, which was decided against him. Torrecampo then filed the present action to recover possession of the land and damages.

ISSUE

Is Lope Torrecampo, as a mortgagee of the land, entitled to recover physical possession (accion publiciana) of the property from Balbino Vitero, who purchased it at an execution sale as the property of the judgment debtor, Pedro Triunfo?

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment absolving the defendant. The Court found that the evidence did not sufficiently establish Torrecampo’s right to physical possession. Even assuming his mortgage was valid and created a prior lien on the property, the execution sale did not extinguish that lien. Torrecampo, as a mere mortgagee, retained his right to enforce his mortgage lien in a proper foreclosure action. However, the facts presented were insufficient to justify a recovery of physical possession in this possessory action. His remedy was to assert and foreclose his mortgage lien, not to recover possession through this suit.