Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

Property Registration Decree PD 1529

Section 75, 76, 77



Section 75. APPLICATION FOR NEW CERTIFICATE UPON
EXPIRATION OF REDEMPTION PERIOD

Upon the expiration of the time, if any, allowed by law for redemption
after registered land has been sold on execution, or taken or sold for
the enforcement of a lien on any description, except a mortgage lien,
the purchaser at such sale or anyone claiming under him may petition
the court for the entry of a new certificate of title to him.

Before the entry of a new certificate of title, the registered owner
may pursue all legal and equitable remedies to impeach or annul such
proceedings.


ESTANISLAO PADILLA, JR. vs. PHILIPPINE PRODUCERS COOPERATIVE MARKETING
ASSOCIATION, INC., G.R. No. 141256 July 15, 2005
Facts:
Petitioner and his wife are the registered owners of the following real
properties. Respondent is a marketing cooperative which had a money claim
against petitioner.
Respondent filed a civil case against petitioner for collection of a sum of
money in the Regional Trial Court of Bacolod City which the trial court rendered
a decision in its favor On November 28, 1989. The subject property lot was
auctioned off to satisfy the judgment, with respondent as the only bidder.
Consequently, a certificate of sale was executed in favor of respondent and the
same was recorded in the Register of Deeds on August 13, 1990.
When petitioner failed to exercise his right of redemption within the 12-
month period allowed by law, the court, on motion of respondent, ordered on
February 5, 1992 the issuance of a writ of possession for the sheriff to cause the
delivery of the physical possession of the properties in favor of respondent
On May 17, 1995, respondent filed a motion to direct the Register of
Deeds to issue new titles over the properties in its name, alleging that the
Register of Deeds (RD) of Bago City would not issue new titles (in respondents
name) unless the owners copies were first surrendered to him.
On July 3, 1995, the trial court issued an order granting the motion. In a
subsequent order dated August 8, 1995, it denied petitioners motion for
reconsideration. Petitioner appealed. Four years later, the Court of Appeals
rendered the assailed decision affirming the order of the trial court. Petitioner
argues that respondent failed to follow the correct procedure for the
cancellation of a certificate of title and the issuance of a new one.
Issues:
Whether or not the motion in question is the proper remedy for cancelling
petitioners certificates of title and new ones issued in its name.
Ruling:
Petitioner is correct in assailing as improper respondents filing of a mere
motion for the cancellation of the old TCTs and the issuance of new ones as a
result of petitioners refusal to surrender his owners duplicate TCTs. This called for
a separate cadastral action initiated via petition. The proper course of action
was to file a petition in court, rather than merely move, for the issuance of new
titles.
Sec. 75 of PD 1529 provides that upon the expiration of the time, if any, allowed
by law for redemption after the registered land has been sold on execution, or
taken or sold for the enforcement of a lien of any description, except a
mortgage lien, the purchaser at such sale or anyone claiming under him may
petition the court for the entry of a new certificate to him.
The reasons behind the law make a lot of sense; it provides due process to
a registered landowner (in this case the petitioner) and prevents the fraudulent
or mistaken conveyance of land, the value of which may exceed the judgment
obligation. The respondent cannot simply disregard proper procedure for the
issuance to it of new certificates of title. There was a law on the matter and
respondent should have followed it. In any event, respondent can still file the
proper petition with the cadastral court for the issuance of new titles in its name.




______________________________________________________________________________
Section 76. NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS

No action to recover possession of real estate, or to quiet title
thereto, or to remove clouds upon the title thereof, or for partition,
or other proceedings of any kind in court directly affecting the title
to and or the use or occupation thereof or the buildings thereon,
and no judgment, and no proceeding to vacate or reverse any
judgment, shall have any effect upon registered land as against
persons other than the parties thereto, unless a memorandum or
notice stating the institution of such action or proceeding and the
court wherein the same is pending, as well as the date of the
institution thereof, together with a reference to the number of the
certificate of title, and an adequate description of the land affected
and the registered owner thereof, shall have been filed and
registered.


1. Nature and Purpose of Lis Pendens

Lis Pendens- Latin term which literally means Pending Suit
Notice of Lis Pendens
o Announcement to the whole world that a particular real
property is in litigation
o A warning that one who acquires an interest over litigated
property does so at his own risk or that he gambles on the
result over litigation over property
Purpose
o Founded upon Public Policy and Necessity
o Keeps the subject matter of litigation within the power of the
court until the judgment or the decree shall have entered;
otherwise, by successive alienations pending the litigation, its
judgment or decree shall be rendered abortive and
impossible of execution.

Two Fold Effect of the Notice:
i. Keep the subject matter of the litigation within the power of
the court until litigation is over.
ii. Binds purchaser, bona fide or not, of the subject of the
litigation to the judgment or decree that court will
promulgate subsequently.
*Note: It is not correct to speak of it as part of the doctrine of
notice, the purchaser pendent elite is affected not by notice
but because the law doesnt allow litigating parties to give to
others, pending the litigation, rights to the property in dispute so
as to prejudice the other party.
Notice is only incidental in the main case. It does not affect the
merits thereof.
Notice need not be annotated on the owners certificate of title
(such annotation is only necessary in voluntary sales), entry in the
day book of the Register of Deeds is sufficient notice to third parties.

2. Notice of Lis Pendens:
When Appropriate When not proper
1. Action to recover possession
of real estate
2. Action to quiet title thereto
3. Action to remove clouds
thereon
4. Action for partition; and
5. Any other proceeding of any
kind in court directly
affecting the title to the land
or the use or occupation
thereof or the building
thereon

1. Preliminary attachments
2. Proceedings for the probate
wills
3. Levies on execution
4. Proceedings for administration
of estate of deceased
persons
5. Proceedings in which the only
object is the recovery of a
money judgement

3. Contents of Notice of Lis Pendens

a. Statement of the institution of an action or proceeding
b. The court where the same is pending
c. The date of its institution
d. Reference to the number of the certificate of title of land
e. An adequate description of the land affected and its registered owner

4. Principle of Primus Tempore, Potior Jure; Effect of Lis Pendens

The principle of primus tempore, potior jure gains greater
significance in the law on double sale of immovable property
Reliance on the principle of constructive notice operates only such
upon the registration of the notice of lis pendens
More fundamentally, a notice of lis pendens is only a warning to the
prospective purchaser or incumbrancer that the particular property
is in litigation and that he should keep his hands off the same, unless
he intends to gamble on the results of the litigation

5. Carry over of notice subsequent titles
In case of subsequent transfers or sales, the RD is duty bound to
carry over the notice of lis pendens on all titles to be issued
Act of RD in erasing notice of lis pendens is in plain violation of his
duty, constitutes misfeasance in the performance of his duties for
which he may be held civilly and even criminally liable for any
prejudice caused to innocent third persons and cannot affect
those who are protected by the notice inscribed in the original title
Such entry of Lis pendens cannot be cancelled until the final
termination of the litigation (General Rule)

COL. FRANCISCO DELA MERCED, substituted by his heirs vs GOVERNMENT
SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM (GSIS) and Spouses VICTOR and MILAGROS
MANLONGAT, G.R. No. 167140 November 23, 2011

Facts:
This case involves five registered parcels of land originally owned by, and
titled in the name of, Jose C. Zulueta (Zulueta), as evidenced by Transfer
Certificate of Title wherein several lots contained in TCT No. 26105 was
mortgaged to GSIS, which eventually foreclosed. Upon consolidation of
GSISs ownership, TCT No. 26105 in Zuluetas name was cancelled, and TCT
No. 23554 was issued in GSISs name.
Upon learning of the foreclosure, petitioners predecessor, Francisco Dela
Merced (Dela Merced) filed a complaint praying for the nullity of the GSIS
foreclosure on the subject properties (Lots 6, 7, 8, and 10 of Block 2 and Lot 8
of Block 8) on the ground that he, not the Zuluetas, was the owner of these
lots at the time of the foreclosure.
Dela Merced caused the annotation of lis pendens on GSISs TCT No.
23554 on September 21, 1984 in order to protect his interests in the subject
properties. Dela Merced died in 1988 and was substituted by his heirs, the
petitioners in the instant case.
On September 11, 2001 Decision was rendered by this Court in G.R. No.
140398 that the foreclosure sale of Lot originally covered by TCT 26105, and
the subsequent certificates of titles issued to GSIS as well as TCT No. PT-94007
in the name of Elizabeth Manlongat are declared null and void.
Such decision has long attained finality but could not be executed because of
the objections raised by the Register of Deeds (RD) and respondent Government
Service Insurance System (GSIS). The respondent argues that the ddecision only
ordered the cancellation of GSISs titles over the subject properties. It did not
order the cancellation of all derivative titles of GSISs transferees.
These objections, which the trial court found insurmountable in its assailed
February 9, 2005 Order, are now presented to us for resolution.
Issue:
Whether a final and executory judgment against GSIS and Manlongat can be
enforced against their successors-in-interest or holders of derivative titles
Ruling:
A notice of lis pendens is an announcement to the whole world that a
particular real property is in litigation, serving as a warning that one who acquires
an interest over said property does so at his own risk, or that he gambles on the
result of the litigation over the said property. Once a notice of lis pendens has
been duly registered, any cancellation or issuance of the title of the land involved
as well as any subsequent transaction affecting the same, would have to be
subject to the outcome of the litigation. In other words, upon the termination of
the litigation there can be no risk of losing the property or any part thereof as a
result of any conveyance of the land or any encumbrance that may be made
thereon posterior to the filing of the notice of lis pendens
It is not disputed that petitioners caused the annotation of lis pendens on TCT
No. 23554, which covers Lots 7 and 8 of Block 2, as early as September 21, 1984. On
July 29, 1985 and August 24, 1998, TCT No. 23554 was cancelled with respect to Lots
7 and 8 of Block 2 and new individual titles were issued to Victorino and Dimaguila.
Both titles had the notice of lis pendens which was carried over from TCT No. 23554.
Ineluctably, both Victorino and Dimaguila had notice of the litigation involving
GSISs ownership over the subject properties, and were bound by the outcome of
the litigation. When a transferee pendente lite takes property with notice of lis
pendens, such transferee undertakes to respect the outcome of the litigation. As
held in Selph v. Vda. de Aguilar, an order to cancel the transferors title may be
enforced against his transferee, whose title is expressly subject to the outcome of
the litigation by the fact of the annotation of lis pendens. The title obtained by the
transferee pendente lite affords him no special protection; he cannot invoke the
rights of a purchaser in good faith and cannot acquire better rights than those of
his predecessor-in-interest.
The Court cannot accept GSISs theory that the dispositive portion of the
Decision in G.R. No. 140398 is enforceable only against GSISs title because it does
not contain the phrase and all its derivative titles. The Court explained that an
action is binding on the privies of the litigants even if such privies are not literally
parties to the action. Their inclusion in the writ of execution does not vary or
exceed the terms of the judgment. In the same way, the inclusion of the
derivative titles in the writ of execution will not alter the Decision in G.R. No.
140398 ordering the cancellation of GSISs title.






__________________________________________________________________________
Section 77. CANCELLATION OF LIS PENDENS

Before final judgment, a notice of lis pendens may be cancelled upon
order of the court, after proper showing that the notice is for the
purpose of molesting the adverse party, or that it is not necessary to
protect the rights of the party who caused it to be registered. It may
also be cancelled by the Register of Deeds upon verified petition of
the party who caused the registration thereof.


Cancellation of Lis Pendens
General Rule: cannot be cancelled while action is pending and undetermined
Exceptions:
a. Upon order of the court
b. Upon action by the RD at the instance of the party who caused the
registration of the notice.
Grounds:
i. If the annotation was for the purpose of
molesting the title of adverse party; or
ii. When the annotation is not necessary to protect
the tite of the party who caused it to be
recorded.







-Nothing Follows-
_______________________________________________________________________