Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co.

vs Nelson Pascual
G.R. No. 163744. Feb 29,2008

FACTS:
Nelson Pascual and Florencia Nevalga were both married. Florencia bought a land, TCT 156283,
and was registered stating that the former was married to nelson. Florencia sought that the marriage be
annuled on the grounds of Psychological incapacity under art36 of the Family Code. RTC rendered that
their marriage as null and void and ordered the dissolution and liquidation of the ex-spouses’ Conjugal
Partnership of gains, but the two failed to do so. Florencia availed for loan from the petitioner worth
P58million and mortgaged several real estate including the lot covered by TCT 156283. Nelson opposed
and filed before the RTC asserting that the said property for foreclosure was without his consent. The
RTC affirmed Nelson’s complaint with moral damages and attorney’s fees. Petitioner appealed in CA. The
result was the same but with modification, deleting the moral and attorney’s fees. The petitioner availed
for certiorari under Rule 45 of the rules of court.

ISSUE:
WON TCT 156283 can still be the subject for mortgage?

RULING:
YES, TCT156283 can still be subject for mortgage in line with the well-established principle that
the binding force of a contract must be recognised as far as it is legally possible to do so. However, only ½
of the undivided portion that Florencia owned will be foreclosed as expressly stated in Art493 of the civil
code that each co-owner shall have full ownership of his or her part and the benefits, and fruits thereto.
He or she may alienate and mortgage only to the portion allotted to him or her upon the termination of
the co-ownership.

WHEREFORE is partly Granted, The RTC’s Decision is Affirmed with Modification.

Premises Considered, with respect to the ½ undivided portion of Nelson, All proceedings thereon are
NULL AND VOID, but VALID with respect to the other ½ undivided portion belonging to Florencia.