TUMALAD vs.

VICENCIO
G.R. No. L-30173, September 30, 1971

Facts:

Vicencio executed a deed of chattel mortgage in favor of Tumalad over their house of strong materials,
which stood on a land that was being rented from Madrigal and company. This was executed to
guarantee a loan of P4,800.00, payable in one year with a 12% per annum interest.

The mortgage was extra-judicially foreclosed upon failure to pay the loan. The house was sold at a public
auction and the Tumalad was the highest bidder. A corresponding certificate of sale was issued.

Thereafter, Tumalad filed an action for ejectment against the Vicencio, praying that they vacate the house
and pay rent until they have completely vacated as they were the proper owners.

Vicencio is questioning the legality of the chattel mortgage on the ground that the mortgage is a house of
strong materials which is an immovable therefore can only be the subject of a real estate mortgage.

Issue:

Whether or not the chattel mortgage was null and void.

Ruling:

The chattel mortgage is valid as they treat such building as personal property.

The court ruled that although a building is by itself an immovable property, parties to a contract may treat
as personal property that which by nature would be real property and it would be valid and good only
insofar as the contracting parties are concerned. By principle of estoppel, the owner declaring his house
to be a chattel may no longer subsequently claim otherwise.

When Vicencio executed the Chattel Mortgage, it specifically provides that the mortgagor cedes, sells and
transfers by way of Chattel mortgage. They intended to treat it as personal property and therefore are
now estopped from claiming otherwise.

Also the house stood on rented land which was held to be personal property since it was placed on the
land by one who had only temporary right over the property thus it does not become immobilized by
attachment.