PEREGRINA REBONG, petitioner, vs. FIDEL IBAEZ, Judge of First Inst n!e of L gun , respondent.

FA"#$% Petitioner Rebong applied for a petition to cancel the annotation on the certificate of title of a land which he inherited from his parents. In which the annotation was pursuant to Sections 1 and 4 of Rule 74 of the Rules of Court ,on settlement of estate, to the effect that the property is still subject to any claim by creditors and other heirs of his deceased parents within 2 years from settlement of estate.

Petitioner based her petition for cancellation on section 112 of Act no. 4 !. "hich pro#ides, $%&'. 112. ... Any registered owner or other person in interest may at any
time apply petition to the court, upon the ground that the registered interests of any description, whether #ested, contingent, e(pectant, or inchoate, ha#e terminated and ceased) or that new interests ha#e arisen or been created which do not appear upon the certificate) ... and the court shall ha#e jurisdiction to hear and determine the petition after notice to all parties in interest, and may order the entry of a new certificate, the entry or cancellation of a memorandum upon a certificate or grant any other relief upon such terms and conditions, re*uiring security if necessary, as it may deem proper) . . . .

%ince the respondent +udge denied her petition, petitioner claims that the +udge acted with gra#e abuse of discretion.

I$$&E% ",- petition to cancel annotation should be allowed . 'ELD% NO /he annotation could -,/ be cancelled because the registered interests ha#e not yet terminated and ceased. /he two year period re*uired by Rule 04 has not yet lapsed when the petition for cancellation was filed. -either section 4, Rule 04 nor Act 4 ! authori1es the substitution of a bond for a lien or registered interest, whether #ested, e(pedient, inchoate or contingent, which ha#e not yet terminated or ceased.