12. Mr. Palautang purchase on installments from Toyota Motors Company a Hi-lux 3.0 pick-up for 1.5 million pesos payable in equal monthly installments for 12 months. To secure the payment of the purchase price, he executed two (2) chattel mortgages: (1) over the pick-up and (2) Yamaha motorcylce in favor of the company. As additional security, Miss. Manlolowas a friend of Mr. Palautang executed a real estate mortgage on a parcel of land owned by her. Subsequently, the company assigned all of its rights with recourse in the three mortgages to Mr. Mapahimuslanon with due notice of the assignment to Mr. Palautang and Miss Manlolowas..

a.) Because of Mr. Palautang's failure to pay three installments, Mr. Mapahimuslanon filed an action for specific performace against Mr. Palautang and obtained a favorable judgment from the court. The sheriff then levied and held an execution sale of the pick up where the highest bidder was Mr. Mapahimuslanon, but there is a deficiency of Php 400,000.00. May Mr. Mapahimuslanon recover the deficiency? reason.

b.) Suppose that Mr. Mapahimuslanon will sue the Toyota Motors for the deficiency, would there be violation of Recto Law if he will be allowed to recover? Reason.

c.) Assuming that Mr. Palautang concealed or refused to deliver the pick-up subject of the chattel mortgage, which constrained Mr. Mapahimuslanon to institute a case for replevin or recovery of personal property against him, and Mr. Mapahimuslanon subsequently foreclosed the mortgage on the the pick-up, would there be violation of Recto Law if Mr. Mapahimuslanon would demand for reimbursement of expenses and attorney's fees? reason