RAMAS VS.

QUIAMCO
G.R No. 146322. December 6, 2006

FACTS:

Quiamco has amicably settled with Davalan, Gabutero and Generoso for the crime of
robbery and that in return, the three had surrendered to Quiamco a motorcycle with its
registration. However, Atty. Ramas has sold to Gabutero the motorcycle in installment but when
the latter did not able to pay the installment, Davalon continued the payment but when he
became insolvent, he said that the motorcycle was taken by Quiamco’s men. However, after
several years, the petitioner Ramas together with policemen took the motorcycle without the
respondent’s permit and shouted that the respondent Quiamco is a thief of motorcycle.
Respondent then filed an action for damages against petitioner alleging that petitioner is liable
for unlawful taking of the motorcycle and utterance of a defamatory remark and filing a baseless
complaint. Also, petitioners claim that they should not be held liable for petitioner’s exercise of
its right as seller-mortgagee to recover the mortgaged motorcycle preliminary to the enforcement
of its right to foreclose on the mortgage in case of default.

ISSUE:

Whether the act of the petitioner is correct.

RULING:

No. The petitioner being a lawyer must know the legal procedure for the recovery of
possession of the alleged mortgaged property in which said procedure must be conducted
through judicial action. Furthermore, the petitioner acted in malice and intent to cause damage to
the respondent when even without probable cause, he still instituted an act against the law on
mortgage.