LA SOCIEDAD ANG IKAGUIGUINHAWA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, VS. SOR JOSEFA SORIANO AND MANUEL SORIANO, DEFENDANTS. SOR JOSEFA SORIANO, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.

On October  3, 1934, appellant  obtained  judgment against Manuel Soriano for the sum of P1,000 in civil case No. 6380 of the Court  of  First  Instance  of  Laguna.   Thereafter Manuel  Soriano delivered to appellant two powers of attorney dated, respectively, December 31, 1932, and September 22, 1933, executed by his sister, the herein appellee Sor Josefa Soriano, whereby she authorized  him to mortgage to appellant and to the Pagsanjan Agricultural Association one half pro indiviso of her land known as lot No. 4066 of the Pagsanjan cadastre  and described in  original certificate of title No. 11277 to guarantee his indebtedness  to them, and bound herself to recognize any incumbrance that might be  constituted on  said  property  in  their  favor.   Manuel Soriano did not execute any mortgage on his sister’s property in favor  of appellant by virtue of said powers of attorney,  but the appellant considered the delivery to it of said powers of attorney as sufficient security.

On January 19, 1937, appellant procured a writ of execution in said civil case No. 6380  against Manuel Soriano and caused the sheriff to levy  upon and sell at public auction one half pro indiviso of said lot No. 4066,  on the assumption that appellee had guaranteed the payment of Manuel Soriano’s obligation.  The sheriff adjudicated said property to appellant as the highest bidder in the sum of P1,308.69, and after the lapse of one year issued to it a final deed of sale.

After failing in its attempt to have the certificate of title transferred to its name by means of a motion in  the cadastral case, appellant instituted the present action  to recover the possession and ownership of the land in question from the appellee.  His Honor,  Judge Alejo Labrador, absolved the  appellee from the complaint,  holding  that appellant acquired no right as purchaser at the sheriff’s sale because the  execution debtor Manuel  Soriano had  no interest or participation in the  property levied upon.

Upon  the undisputed facts  above set forth,  we are at a loss to see how plaintiff’s action could prosper.   It is true that appellee authorized her brother to  mortgage the land in question in favor of appellant;  but until that authority was exercised, it  is too obvious for argument that appellant could claim no right either to said land or against appellee.  Appellee’s obligation to recognize any incumbrance that might be constituted  on her land certainly did not accrue until such incumbrance was actually constituted. Even if appellee had authorized Manuel Soriano to sell the  land in question to pay his obligation, as contended by appellant, the stubborn fact remains that Manuel Soriano did not exercise that authority.   It was  the sheriff who sold the  land in question on the assumption that Manuel Soriano had an interest or participation therein.   That assumption being false, the purchaser acquired nothing by virtue of the  sale.

Appellant further contends that the trial court should have granted  its alternative  prayer that  Manuel  Soriano and the appellee be sentenced to pay appellant the  total sum of P2,761.83 with compound interest at 12% per annum from July 3, 1938, on the theory that appellee had constituted herself a surety for  her  brother and codefendant. There is no basis in fact and in law for such contention.

his appeal is entirely devoid of merit.  The judgment is affirmed, with costs against the appellant.  So ordered.

Yulo, C.J., Moran,  and Bocobo, JJ., concur.
Paras, J., concurs in the result.