SUNICO, MA. SHENNA DARYL S.

ANTICHRESIS
75) Enriquez v. National Bank, No. 33584, December 15, 1930

FACTS:
Marcelo Enriquez was indebted to the Philippine National Bank (Cebu) for P4,512.21,
one of his sureties was Laureano Abella. By virtue of a complaint filed by PNB against
Marcelo Enriquez, Laureano Abella and Andres Abella to collect the amount of P3,554.66,
the Court of First Instance (Cebu) rendered a judgment requiring the defendants therein to
pay PNB the sum of P4,512.21 jointly and severally, with interest at 9% per annum. With the
consent of PNB, the decision was revoked. However, by agreement of the parties, the
judgment was reinstated with the condition that a writ of execution would be issued first
against Enriquez, and in case of his insolvency, against Laureano and Andres Abella.
Accordingly, two parcels of land belonging to Enriquez were sold to PNB itself, being the
highest bidder. Later, Enriquez’s right of redemption was likewise sold and was adjudicated
to Laureano Abella. For nonpayment of land tax, the two lots were forfreited by the
Government. At the request of Enriquez, PNB redeemed the said lands, paying the
delinquent land taxes amounting to P2,004,48. The said public auction sale has been
declared null and void by the lower court in the judgment appealed from.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Enriquez is entitled to damages for the possession of PNB of the lands
in question from the time they were redeemed from the government.

HELD:
YES. Article 2132 of the Civil Code provides that: “By a contract of antichresis the
creditor acquires the right to receive the fruits of an immovable of his debtor, with the
obligation to apply them to the payment of the interest, if owing, and thereafter to the
principal of his credit.” In this case, the judicial sale of the two parcels of land under
execution, having been held null and void, reverted to the same juridical condition in which
they were before said sale. When PNB redeemed them from the government, it was acting
as a judgment creditor. Furthermore, under Section 377 of the Administrative Code, PNB
acquired a lien on them by virtue of said redemption, and the government was divested of
the ownership thereof which reverted in the original owner, Enriquez. PNB then, cannot be
said to have held the property by virtue of the redemption in behalf of the government, but as
creditor with a lien thereon.

Since the PNB took possession of the two parcels of land with the consent of Enriquez,
it held the land as an antichretic creditor with the right to collect the debt with interest from
the fruits, returning to the antichretic debtor the balance, if any, after deducting the
expenses. The fact that Enriquez consented and asked PNB to take charge of managing
said property does not entitle the latter to appropriate itself the fruits thereof unless the
former has expressly waived his right thereto.

The creditor who redeems from the government real estate belonging to his debtor,
forfeited for delinquency in the payment of the land tax, and takes possession thereof, is
bound to render an account of the net proceeds received from said property after deducting
all the expenses incurred and the amount advanced for the redemption, with interest.