The Technology Application and Promotion Institute (TAPI), a line agency of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST), has won its case involving foreclosure proceedings over a bad loan.
In a recently released 12-page decision written by Associate Justice Florencio Mamauag Jr., the appellate court’s 17th Division denied for lack of merit the suit filed by Jesselito Baring arising from a loan he obtained through the Investor’s Financing Fund which was approved by TAPI, an agency created in 1987 with the primary responsibility to implement Republic Act 7459, or the Inventors and Invention Incentives Act of the Philippines.
Following the agency’s approval, the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) in 2001 granted a PHP4-million loan for Baring’s project called Rotating Biological Contractor with the loan payable in three years.
Baring mortgaged his building, along with machinery and vehicles owned by his company, JV Baring Consultants and Allied Services.
He later entered into an agreement to restructure the loan after the firm faced hard times.
In 2007, DBP sent two notices for him to settle his obligations.
A year later, DBP and TAPI entered into a deed of assignment where the bank assigned to the agency all its rights in the loan and mortgage contract of Baring.
In 2013, the loan ballooned to PHP10.329 million, prompting the Office of the Solicitor General to issue a final demand letter.
A complaint for foreclosure was filed by TAPI a year later before the Makati Regional Trial Court Branch 66) while Baring filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the agency “has no legal capacity to sue” and “has no cause of action against him”.
He argued that DBP — not TAPI — is the proper party to sue.
Baring’s motion was turned down by the Makati court, prompting him to elevate it to the CA.
In denying Baring’s suit for lack of merit, the CA said “the trial court did not abuse nor exceeded the exercise of its jurisdiction when it denied the petitioner’s (Baring)’s motion to dismiss” and said that following the deed of assignment, TAPI acquired the rights and interests of DBP in the loan including the right to sue.
“As the assignee, TAPI has the legal capacity to bring the suit in its own name against the petitioner,” the CA ruled.
Source: Philippines News Agency
