Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Execution Sale, When Postponement Valid

The condition for the postponement of execution sale (auction sale) to satisfy a judgment must be met. Otherwise, the sale must push through, and a sale at any other date is a nullity.
xxx
As correctly pointed out by the respondent court (and the trial court), the proper notice and publication in a newspaper was made for the sale at public auction scheduled for March 27, 1971. On motion, however, of private respondents, the trial court in an Order dated March 26, 1971, directed the sale set for March 27, 1971 postponed provided the movant would pay the publication fees, otherwise the public auction would continue at a date to be designated by the Sheriff. The movant did not pay the publication fees hence there was no postponement of the public auction sale since the condition precedent or suspensive condition (that of paying the publication fees) was not complied with. 7 There was therefore no valid postponement of the public auction sale. And there was no written consent of debtor and creditor and neither was there any agreement in writing by the parties authorizing the sheriff or the officer making the sale to adjourn the same "to any date agreed upon in writing by the parties." 8
The public auction sale set for March 27, 1971, should have been held considering that the said schedule complied with all the requirements of law regarding a public sale, including notice and publication. The officer may adjourn the sale from day to day if it is necessary to do so for lack of time to complete the sale on the date fixed in the notice. 9 But he may not adjourn to another date unless with the written consent of the parties. 10 This was precisely the point of the appellate court when it stressed the fact that there was no written agreement between the debtor and the creditor to postpone the sale, and in fact there was no sale held on the scheduled date 11 to warrant the application of Section 24, Rule 39 of the Revised Rules of Court.
Considering, therefore, that there was no valid postponement of the original date of the auction sale on March 27, 1971, "then the alleged public auction sale on July 16, 1971 or close to four months after the original date of sale on March 27, 1971 without the proper notice and publication is null and void" as correctly pointed out by the respondent court. 12
xxx
 
JOSE ABROGAR, et al. vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, et al., G.R. No. L-67970 January 15, 1988
Read the full text of the case here.
 

No comments:

Post a Comment