TUMALAD V.

VICENCIO
FACTS: Vicencio and Simeon executed a chattel mortgage in favor of plaintiffs
Tumalad over their house, which was being rented by Madrigal and company. This
was executed to guarantee a loan, payable in one year with a 12% per annum
interest. The mortgage was extrajudicially foreclosed upon failure to pay the loan.
The house was sold at a public auction and the plaintiffs were the highest bidder. A
corresponding certificate of sale was issued. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed an action
for ejectment against the defendants, praying that the latter vacate the house as
they were the proper owners.
ISSUE: W/N the chattel mortgage was null and void ab initio because only personal
properties can be subject of a chattel mortgage.
HELD: Certain deviations have been allowed from the general doctrine that
buildings are immovable property such as when through stipulation, parties may
agree to treat as personal property those by their nature would be real property.
This is partly based on the principle of estoppel wherein the principle is predicated
on statements by the owner declaring his house as chattel, a conduct that may
conceivably stop him from subsequently claiming otherwise.
In the case at bar, though there be no specific statement referring to the subject
house as personal property, yet by ceding, selling or transferring a property through
chattel mortgage could only have meant that defendant conveys the house as
chattel, or at least, intended to treat the same as such, so that they should not now
be allowed to make an inconsistent stand by claiming otherwise.