331915202 67 Pacific Wide Realty and Dev t Corp vs Puerto Azul Land Inc 2009

67. Pacific Wide Realty and Dev’t Corp vs. Puerto Azul Land, Inc.

AC!"# In G.R. No. 180893

Puerto Puerto Azul

Land, Land,

Inc. Inc.

(PALI) (PALI) is

the owner and

develo developer per of

the Puerto Puerto

Azul Azul

Comple Complex x

situat situated ed

in

Ternate, Cavite. In order to finance its operations, it otained loans from various an!s. "owever, PALI was unale to !eep up with the pa#ment of its oli$ations, oth current and those that were aout to fall due. %ne of its creditors, the &xport and Industr# 'an! (&I')  later sustituted # Pacific ide *ealt# and +evelopment Corporation Corporation (P*+C)  filed foreclosure proceedin$s on PALIs PALIs mort$a$ed properties. properties.

PALI

filed a petition for suspension of pa#ments and rehailitation, accompanied # a proposed rehailitation plan and three () nominees for the appointment of a rehailitation receiver. %n +ecemer -, //0, the *TC rendered a +ecision approvin$ PALIs petition for suspension of pa#ments and rehailitation. In G.R. No. 178768

%n 1arch 1arch , //0, //0, &I' filed filed an ur$ent ur$ent motion motion to order order PALI PALI

and2or and2or the mort$a mort$a$or $or T3I2re T3I2reha haili ilitat tation ion

receiver receiver to pa# all the taxes taxes due on Transfer Transfer Certificate Certificate of Title Title (TCT) 4o. --56. --56.

&I' claimed claimed that

the propert# covered # TCT 4o. --56, re$istered in the name of T3I, was one of the properties used to secure PALI7s loan from &I'. PALI opposed the motion, ar$uin$ that the rehailitation courts sta# order stopped the enforcement of all claims, whether for mone# or otherwise, a$ainst a detor, its $uarantors, and its sureties not solidaril# liale to the detor8 thus, TCT 4o. --56 was covered # the sta# order. The court reiterated that TCT 4o. --56, under the name of T3I, was excluded from the sta# order. In order to protect the interest of &I' as creditor of PALI, it ma# foreclose TCT 4o. --56 and settle the delin9uenc# taxes of third:part# mort$a$or T3I with the local $overnment of Pasa# Cit#. PALI filed with the CA a petition for certiorari under *ule 50 of the *ules of Court, ascriin$ $rave ause of discretion on the part of the rehailitation court in allowin$ the foreclosure of a mort$a$e consti constitut tuted ed

over over

the

proper propert# t#

of

an

accomm accommoda odatio tion n

mort$a mort$a$or $or, ,

to

secure secure

the

loan loan

oli$a oli$atio tions ns

of

a

corporation see!in$ relief in a rehailitation proceedin$. On July 27, 2009, the Court ordered the conolidation o! the t"o #etition.

I""

%$whether the terms of the rehailitation plan are unreasonale and in violation of the non:impairment clause R$LI&'

4o. The terms of the rehailitation plan are reasonale and does not violate the non:impairment clause

3nder the *ules of Procedure on Corporate *ehailitation, rehailitation is defined as the restoration of the detor to a position of successful operation and solvenc#, if it is shown that its continuance of operation is economicall# feasile and its creditors can recover # wa# of the present value of pa#ments

pro;ected in the plan, more if the corporation continues as a $oin$ concern than if it is immediatel# li9uidated. e find nothin$ onerous in the terms of PALIs rehailitation plan.

The restructurin$ of the dets of

PALI is part and parcel of its rehailitation. 1oreover, per findin$s of fact of the *TC and as affirmed # the CA, the restructurin$ of the dets of PALI would not e pre;udicial to the interest of P*+C as a secured creditor.

e also find no merit in P*+Cs contention that there is a violation of the impairment clause.