G.R. No. L-23971 November 29, 1968
ASSOCIATED INSURANCE & SURETY CO., INC., plaintiff-appellee, vs. ANTONIO BANZON and ROSA BALAMACEDA, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

In Civil Case No. 31237 of the Court of First Instance of Manila, a judgment was rendered against defendants Maximo Sta. Maria and Antonio R. Banzon, ordering them to pay jointly and severally certain amounts to plaintiff Associated Insurance and Surety Co., Inc. This decision became final and executory. A writ of execution was issued, and properties of judgment debtor Antonio R. Banzon, covered by Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 39685 and 53759 issued in his name by the Register of Deeds of Rizal, were levied upon and sold at public auction. The plaintiff was the highest bidder. After the redemption period expired without redemption, the plaintiff obtained a final certificate of sale. The plaintiff then demanded that Banzon surrender the owner’s duplicate certificates of title, but he refused. Consequently, the plaintiff filed a petition in the Court of First Instance of Rizal to compel Banzon to present the titles for cancellation and for the issuance of new titles in its name. Banzon, joined by his wife Rosa Balmaceda, opposed the petition, claiming (1) the judgment in Civil Case No. 31237 was void as to him due to lack of summons, and (2) the levied properties were conjugal and thus could not be held liable for his personal debt.

ISSUE

(1) Whether the judgment in Civil Case No. 31237 is valid and binding upon Antonio Banzon despite his claim of not having been served summons. (2) Whether the properties levied and sold are conjugal properties exempt from execution for Banzon’s personal debt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision, ordering the appellants to surrender the certificates of title. On the first issue, the Court held that the presumption of regularity of official proceedings stands, and the burden to prove lack of summons was on the oppositors, which they failed to discharge. The records showed counsel represented all defendants in that case, giving rise to the presumption that summons was duly served or Banzon voluntarily appeared. Furthermore, Banzon’s receipt of notices of execution and levy, and his failure to timely challenge the sale through a third-party claim or injunction, militated against his claim of lack of due process. On the second issue, the Court found the claim that the properties were conjugal unsubstantiated. The Transfer Certificates of Title were issued in the name of Antonio R. Banzon alone, and there was insufficient evidence to prove the properties were acquired during the marriage. Therefore, the appeal was without merit.