Quintanilla vs CA G.R. No. 101747 Facts: On 12 July 1983, plaintif ( petitioner ) executed a Real Estate Mortgage on a parcel o land, situated in t!e "ity o "e#u in a$or o deendant, R"%", R"%", to secure a credit line in t!e a&ount o ',***+**+ ',***+**+ 'laintif a$ailed, ro& t!is collateralied credit line, t!e a&ount a &ount o '2,***+** only, secured and e$idenced #y pro&issory, -it! interest at t!e rate o 38. per annu&+ 'laintif, 'erecta 'erecta /uintanilla, -!o is engaged in #usiness, under t!e na&e and style, "e#u "ane 'roducts, exports exports rattan products a#road+ 0n connection t!ere-it!, s!e esta#lis!ed -it! deendant, R"%", ad$ance credit line, or !er export #ills against etters o "redit ro& !er custo&ers a#road+ lso, on an e$en date, 23 Octo#er 198, plaintif secured ro& deendant, R"%", a loan o '1**,***+**, '1**,***+**, against !er ad$ance export credit line+ gain on o$e&#er 8, 198, plaintif secured anot!er ad$ance credit o '1**,***+** against !er ad$ance export credit line+ On 2* o$e&#er 198, plaintif s!ipped stoc4s o !er "ane 'roducts to !er #uyer in %elgiu& upon a etter o "redit, under Export %ill o+ 85199+ 6eendant, R"%", recei$ed t!e proceeds o t!is export s!ip&ent, in t!e a&ount o '2*8,73*+**, '2*8,73*+**, ro& %an4 %russels a&#ert e- or4+ On o$e&#er 2:, 198, plaintif &ade anot!er s!ip&ent ro& !er "e#u "ane 'roducts, under Export %ill o+ 82*+ "onse;uently, R"%" R"%" sent t!e export docu&ents to t!e issuing #an4 or collection+ ?2*,:21+:*+ ter persistent de&and or rei&#urse&ent, ro& %an4 %russels a&#ert %elgiu&, deendant, R"%", R"%", returned and rei&#ursed rei&#ursed t!e total su& o => ?2*,:21+:* to %an4 %russels a&#ert%elgiu&+ a&#ert%elgiu&+ R"%", R"%", t!en de&anded pay&ents ro& t!e plaintif, t!e -!ole a&ount, including t!e a&ount o '2,***+**, '2,***+**, it collateried #y t!e real estate &ortgage+ @or ailing to co&ply -it! t!e de&ands, R"%" soug!t to oreclose t!e real estate &ortgage, not only or t!e a&ount o '2,***+** #ut also
or t!e a&ount o '**,99+39 -!ic! represents petitionerAs su#se;uent credit acco&&odations+ ReBecting R"%"As clai&, petitioner Cled an action or speciCc peror&ance, da&ages and attorneyAs ees -it! prayer or a -rit o preli&inary inBunction, alleging t!at t!e o#ligation or -!ic! t!e &ortgage -as executed -as only or t!e &axi&u& a&ount o ',***+** and t!at petitioner !ad already paid !er ot!er unsecured loans+ R"%" Cled an ans-er denying petitionerAs clai& and set up a counterclai& or t!e pay&ent o all !er ot!er outstanding loans D totalling '**,79+39+ ter trial, t!e R" rendered Budg&ent in a$or o t!e petitionerAs clai&+ R"%" appealed to t!e " i&puting error to t!e trial court in not granting its counterclai& and in ruling t!at t!e oreclosure o t!e &ortgage -as li&ited to t!e '2,***+** a$ailed o #y petitioner+ !e " aFr&ed t!e R" ruling in so ar as t!e oreclosure -as li&ited to t!e a&ount o '2,***+** #ut &odiCed t!e sa&e #y granting t!e counterclai&+ ggrie$ed, petitioner &o$ed or a partial reconsideration, arguing or t!e Crst ti&e t!at respondent R"%"As counterclai& is per&issi$e in nature or -!ic! t!e trial court !as not ac;uired Burisdiction due to t!e nonpay&ent o t!e doc4et ees+ 'etitionerAs &otion -as denied #y t!e ", t!oug! it a&ended its earlier decision #y ordering respondent R"%" to pay doc4et ees on t!e counterclai&+
Issue: G!et!er respondent R"%"As counterclai& is co&pulsory or per&issi$e in nature+ Rulings: !e counterclai& is co&pulsory in nature+ !e a&ount stated in t!e &ortgage contract #et-een petitioner and R"%" does not li&it t!e a&ount or -!ic! it &ay stand as security considering t!at under t!e ter&s o t!at contract, t!e intent to secure uture inde#tedness is apparent+ 0t -ould !a$e #een diferent i t!e &ortgage contract in t!e case at #ar si&ply pro$ides t!at it -as intended only Hto secure t!e pay&ent o t!e sa&e and t!ose t!at &ay !ereater #e o#tained t!e principal o all o -!ic! is !ere#y Cxed at ',***+**+++I et t!e parties to t!e &ortgage contract urt!er stipulated H+++ as -ell as t!ose t!at t!e Mortgagee &ay extend to t!e MortgagorI+ !e latter p!rase clearly &eans t!at t!e &ortgage is not li&ited to Bust t!e Cxed a&ount #ut also co$ers ot!er credit
acco&&odations in excess t!ereo+ !us, t!e general rule t!at &ortgage &ust #e li&ited to t!e a&ount &entioned in t!e &ortgage cannot #e applied !erein+ Rat!er #y speciCc pro$ision and agree&ent o t!e parties, t!e &ortgage contract -as designed to secure e$en uture ad$ance&ents+
Having determined tat te mortgage contract e!tends even to "etitioner#s oter advances in e!cess o$ te %&'(000.00( RC)C#s counterclaim $or suc oter advances cannot *ut *e considered as com"ulsor+ in nature. ,uc counterclaim necessaril+ arises out o$ te transaction or occurrence tat is te su*-ect matter o$ "etitioner#s claim -!ic! is to enBoin t!e oreclosure o t!e latterAs ot!er credit acco&&odations in excess o '2,***+**+ It tus satises te /com"elling test o$ com"ulsoriness ic re2uires /a logical relationsi" *eteen te claim and counterclaim( tat is( ere conducting se"arate trials o$ te res"ective claims o$ te "arties ould entail a su*stantial du"lication o$ e3ort and time *+ te "arties and te court + )ot claims are merel+ o3soots o$ te same *asic controvers++ Moreo$er, R"%"As counterclai& does not re;uire or its adBudication t!e presence o t!ird parties upon -!o& t!e court cannot ac;uire Burisdiction and t!e court !as Burisdiction to entertain t!e clai&+ @inally, e$en granting t!at R"%"As counterclai& is per&issi$e -!ere t!e trial court !as no5cannot exercise Burisdiction o$er said clai& unless5until t!e corresponding doc4et ees t!ereor !as #een paid, petitioner is !o-e$er #arred #y estoppel ro& c!allenging t!e trial courtAs Burisdiction+
