G.R. No. L-10169, October 23, 1916
RUPERTO MONTINOLA, plaintiff-appellant, vs. JUAN TUASON, receiver for the liquidators Hollmann & Company, and JOSE LOCSIN, receiver of the attached property of Ceferino Domingo Lim, defendants-appellees.

FACTS:
1. On October 19, 1905, Kuenzle & Streiff (representing Hollmann & Company) filed an action in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo to foreclose a mortgage executed by Ceferino Domingo Lim on a hacienda named “Guadalupe.”
2. On March 1, 1906, the court rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, amended to include Juan Tuason as receiver, ordering Lim to pay P44,067.24 and declaring the sum a mortgage lien on the hacienda. The judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court on January 29, 1908.
3. Instead of foreclosing the mortgage specifically, the plaintiff sought to satisfy the judgment through an ordinary writ of execution.
4. Pursuant to the writ, the sheriff attached and sold the hacienda at public auction on November 21, 1910, to Gregorio Yulo for P4,500. The certificate of sale provided the judgment debtor (Lim) a one-year period of redemption.
5. On October 12, 1911, Ruperto Montinola purchased from Ceferino Domingo Lim his right to redeem the property. On October 24, 1911, within the one-year redemption period, Montinola notified the sheriff of his purchase and offered to pay the redemption amount.
6. The defendants opposed Montinola’s right to redeem. The Court of First Instance ruled against Montinola, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE:
Whether the plaintiff-appellant, Ruperto Montinola, as a successor-in-interest to the judgment debtor, has the right to exercise the equity of redemption over the hacienda sold at public auction under an ordinary execution.

RULING:
YES. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the lower court and upheld Montinola’s right to redeem.
1. Although the underlying obligation was secured by a mortgage, the judgment creditors elected to enforce their final and executory judgment through an ordinary writ of execution, not through a special foreclosure proceeding. Consequently, the sale of the property was governed by the rules on execution sales, not mortgage foreclosure sales.
2. Under Section 465 of Act No. 190 (Code of Civil Procedure), the judgment debtor, or his successor in interest (under Section 464), is granted the right to redeem property sold at an execution sale within twelve (12) months by paying the purchaser the purchase price plus 1% per month interest and any subsequent taxes or assessments paid by the purchaser.
3. The record established that Montinola validly purchased the right of redemption from the judgment debtor, Ceferino Domingo Lim, thereby becoming his successor-in-interest. His offer to redeem was made within the statutory one-year period and in compliance with the legal requirements.
4. Therefore, having complied with the provisions of law, Montinola is entitled to redeem the hacienda in question.

Separate Opinion:
Justice Moreland concurred in the result but on a different ground. He expressed doubt that a mere “equity of redemption” could be sold separately from the land itself. He based his concurrence on the trial court’s finding that Montinola had purchased the land itself from the judgment debtor, not merely the right of redemption.