I.
INTRODUCTION period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and
REGALIAN DOCTRINE / JURA REGALIA
 Regalian doctrine declares that all lands and all other natural resources are owned
by the State.
 Private title to land must be traced to some grant, express or implied, from the
Spanish Crown or its successors, the American Colonial government, and
thereafter, the Philippine Republic.
 “Jura regalia” refers to royal rights, or those rights which the King has by virtue of
his prerogatives.
 a right which the sovereign has over anything in which a subject has a right of
property or propriedad.
a. Ancestral Domain
All areas generally belonging to ICCs/IPs comprising lands, inland waters, coastal areas, and
natural resources therein, held under a claim of ownership, occupied or possessed by
ICCs/IPs, by themselves or through their ancestors, communally or individually since time
immemorial, continuously to the present except when interrupted by war, force majeure or
displacement by force, deceit, stealth or as a consequence of government projects or any
other voluntary dealings entered into by government and private individuals/corporations,
and which are necessary to ensure their economic, social and cultural welfare. It shall include
ancestral lands, forests, pasture, residential, agricultural, and other lands individually owned
whether alienable and disposable or otherwise, hunting grounds, burial grounds, worship
areas, bodies of water, mineral and other natural resources, and lands which may no longer
be exclusively occupied by ICCs/IPs but from which they traditionally had access to for their
subsistence and traditional activities, particularly the home ranges of ICCs/IPs who are still
nomadic and/or shifting cultivators.
b. Constitutional basis of Regalian Doctrine
Section 2 of Article XII on “National Economy and Patrimony
“SEC. 2. All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral
oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and
other natural resources are owned by the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all
other natural resources shall not be alienated. The exploration, development and utilization
of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State
may directly undertake such activities or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or
production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least
sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be for a
under such terms and conditions as may be provided by law. In cases of water rights for
irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water
power, beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the grant.”
Cruz vs. Sec. of Environment and Natural Resources: Justice Kapunan, voting to dismiss the
petition, stated that the Regalian theory does not negate native title to lands held in private
ownership since time immemorial. In the words of Justice Holmes, “when, as far back as
testimony or memory goes, the land has been held by individuals under a claim of private
ownership, it will be presumed to have been held in the same way from before the Spanish
conquest, and never to have been public land.”
The above ruling institutionalized the recognition of the existence of native title to land, or
ownership of land by Filipinos by virtue of possession under a claim of ownership since time
immemorial and independent of any grant from the Spanish Crown, as an exception to the
theory of jura regalia.
TORRENS SYSTEM OF REGISTRATION
a. History
In the Torrens system, title by registration takes the place of “title by deeds” of the system
under the “general” law. A sale of land, for example, is effected by a registered transfer,
upon which a certificate of title is issued. The certificate is guaranteed by statute, and, with
certain exceptions, constitutes indefeasible title to the land mentioned therein.
b. Purpose
Legarda v. Saleeby: to quiet title to land; to put a stop forever to any question of the legality
of the title, except claims which were noted at the time of registration, in the certificate, or
which may arise subsequent thereto. That being the purpose of the law, once a title is
registered the owner may rest secure, without the necessity of waiting in the portals of the
court, or sitting in the “mirador de su casa,” to avoid the possibility of losing his land.
to avoid possible conflicts of title to real estate and to facilitate transactions relative thereto
by giving the public the right to rely upon the face of a Torrens certificate of title and to
dispense with the need of inquiring further, except when the party concerned has actual
knowledge of facts and circumstances that should impel a reasonably cautious man to make
such further inquiry.
c. Advantages
(a) It has substituted security for insecurity;
(b) It has reduced the cost of conveyances from pounds to shillings, and the time occupied
from months to days;
 TD
(c) It has exchanged brevity and clearness for obscurity and
verbiage;
(d) It has so simplified ordinary dealings that he who has mastered the ‘three R’s’ can
transact his own conveyancing;
(e) It affords protection against fraud;
(f) It has restored to their just value many estates, held under good holding titles, but
depreciated in consequence of some blur or technical defect, and has barred the
reoccurrence of any similar faults.
d. Effect of Registration
After the registration is complete and final and there exists no fraud, there are no innocent
third parties who may claim an interest. The rights of all the world are foreclosed by the
decree of registration. The certificate of registration accumulates in one document a precise
and correct statement of the exact status of the fee held by its owner. The certificate, in the
absence of fraud, is the evidence of title and shows exactly the real interest of its owner. The
title once registered, with very few exceptions, should not thereafter be impugned, altered,
changed, modified, enlarged, or diminished, except in some direct proceeding permitted by
law.
 Section 51 of PD 1529 in relation to registration: The act of registration shall be the
operative act to convey or affect the land insofar as third persons are concerned,
and in all cases under this Decree, the registration shall be made in the office of the
Register of Deeds for the province or city where the land lies.
e. Evidence of Ownership
Registration does not vest title. It is merely evidence of such title over a particular property.
Registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership but is merely a procedure to establish
evidence of title over realty.
Registration does not give the registrant a better right than what the registrant had prior to
the registration. The registration of lands of the public domain under the Torrens system, by
itself, cannot convert public lands into private lands.
LAWS AFFECTING LAND REGISTRATION
(1) The Public Land Act (CA No. 141)
- the Public Land Act operated on the assumption that title to public lands in the
Philippine Islands remained in the government.
- The term “public land” referred to all lands of the public domain whose title still
remained in the government and are thrown open to private appropriation and
settlement, and excluded the patrimonial property of the government and the friar
lands.
(2) The Land Registration Act (Act No. 496)
- created a court called the “Court of Land Registration” which had exclusive
jurisdiction over all applications for registration, with power to hear and determine
all questions arising upon such applications
- It does not create a title nor vest one. It simply confirms a title already created and
already vested, rendering it forever indefeasible.
- The office of the court is solely to register title.
(3) The Cadastral Act (Act No. 2259)
- When, in the opinion of the President, the public interest requires that title to any
lands be settled and adjudicated, he shall order the Director of Lands to make a
survey thereof, with notice to all persons claiming an interest therein.
- Thereafter, the Director of Lands, represented by the Solicitor General, shall
institute registration proceedings by filing a petition in the proper court against the
holders, claimants, possessors or occupants of such lands, stating that the public
interest requires that the titles to such lands be settled and adjudicated.
-
(4) The Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529)
- the Decree “supersedes all other laws relative to registration of property.”
- Regional Trial Courts of the city or province where the land lies exercise jurisdiction
over applications for registration and all subsequent proceedings relative thereto,
subject to judicial review.
REGISTRATION IS AN AN ACTION IN REM
Upon the presentation in court of an application for the registration of the title to lands, the
theory under the Torrens system is that all occupants, adjoining owners, adverse claimants,
and other interested persons are notified of the proceedings, and have a right to appear in
opposition to such application. In other words, the proceeding is against the whole world.
STATUS OF OTHER PRE-EXISTING LAND REGISTRATION SYSTEMS
a. Spanish Mortgage Law: The system of registration under the Spanish Mortgage Law is
hereby discontinued and all lands recorded under said system which are not yet covered by
Torrens title shall be considered as unregistered lands.
LAND REGISTRATION AUTHORITY
 TD

The Land Registration Commission has been renamed Land Registration Authority (LRA)
pursuant to the Administrative Code of 1987.
a. Purpose
(a) Extend speedy and effective assistance to the Department
of Agrarian Reform, the Land Bank, and other agencies in the implementation of the land
reform program of the government;
(b) Extend assistance to courts in ordinary and cadastral land registration proceedings;
(c) Be the central repository of records relative to original registration of lands titled under
the Torrens system, including subdivision and consolidation plans of titled lands.
b. Register of Deeds
The Civil Code, in Article 708, has provided for the establishment of a Registry of Property
which has for its object the inscription or annotation of acts and contracts relating to the
ownership and other rights over immovable property.
JUDICIAL REGISTRATION
a. Administrative Registration
● Laws affecting administrative registration
- CA 141, which dealt with acquisition and registration of Public Agricultural Lands
b. Difference between judicial and administrative registration
The judicial way involves filing a petition in court for original registration of title for a
property with no existing title. The claimant must be able to present proof of land
possession, along with all other requirements by the court.
After resolving the petition, the court will issue an order directing the LRA to issue a decree
of registration, and the corresponding original certificate of title (OCT) that will be registered
with the RD.
On the other hand, the administrative way is coursed through the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and other agencies that have authority to issue
public land title. The claimant can go to the DENR and apply for a patent.
II. REQUISITES FOR JUDICIAL REGISTRATION
WHO MAY APPLY FOR LAND REGISTRATION
SEC. 14. Who may apply. — The following persons may file in the proper Court of First
Instance an application for registration of title to land, whether personally or through their
duly authorized representatives:
(1) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable
lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or
earlier.
(2) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under the provisions
of existing laws.
(3) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or abandoned river beds by right of
accession or accretion under the existing laws.
(4) Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner provided for by law.
Where the land is owned in common, all the co-owners shall file the application jointly.
WHO AS PEOPLE??
a. Citizens – only Filipinos
b. Former Citizens – ex. A natural born citizen who has lost citizenship but still has capacity
to transact
Limitation: 5k sqm for urban areas, 3k sqm for rural areas
c. Foreigners – only by hereditary succession
Land sold to an alien which is subsequently transferred to the hands of a Filipino may no
longer be annulled.
● Purpose of prohibition: reserved to Filipinos! (constitution)
The Krivenko doctrine: aliens disqualified from acquiring public and private lands., but
can lease
d. Corporations
Private corporations or associations are disqualified from acquiring alienable lands of the
public domain.
● Purpose of prohibition
the constitutional intent, both under the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions, is to transfer
ownership of only a limited area of alienable land of the public domain to a qualified
individual.
 TD

The available alienable public lands are gradually decreasing in the face of an ever-growing
population. The most effective way to insure faithful adherence to this constitutional intent
is to grant or sell alienable lands of the public domain only to individuals.
● Corporation Sole
Republic v. Intermediate Appellate Court and Roman Catholic Archbishop of Lucena: A
corporation sole is qualified to own and register private agricultural land. A corporation sole
by the nature of its incorporation is vested with the right to purchase and hold real estate
and personal property. It need not therefore be treated as an ordinary private corporation
because whether or not it be so treated as such, the Constitutional provision involved will,
nevertheless, be not applicable.
A corporation sole is a special form of corporation usually associated with the clergy.
e. Co-owners, Vendees a retro, Trustees
Co-owner cannot file an application for registration of the whole area without joining the co-
owners as applicants. Co-owners shall file application jointly.
Having the legal title to the land, the vendee a retro has therefore a registrable title thereto
which may be the subject of initial registration. Vendee a retro may file application in his
name.
Where the land has been sold under pacto de retro, the vendor a retro may file an
application for the original registration of the land, provided, however, that should the
period for redemption expire during the pendency of the registration proceedings and
ownership to the property consolidated in the vendee a retro, the latter shall be substituted
for the applicant and may continue the proceedings.
A trustee on behalf of his principal may apply for original registration of any land held in trust
by him, unless prohibited by th83e instrument creating the trust.
REQUISITES UNDER SECTION 14(1) OF PD 1529
Sec. 14(1). Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in
open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and
disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12,
1945, or earlier.
REQUISITES FOR FILING OF APPLICATION
1. That the property in question is alienable and disposable land of the public domain
2. That the applicants, by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in
open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation.
3. That such possession is under bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
TYPES OF LAND
(a) Alienable or disposable, (b) Timber, and (c) Mineral lands and (d) National Parks
ALIENABLE AND DISPOSABLE LAND UNDER PUBLIC DOMAIN
a. Agricultural land (Agricultural land refers to the share of land area that is arable, under
permanent crops, and under permanent pasture) v Alienable and Disposable Land
(refer to those lands of the public domain which have been the subject of the present
system of classification and declared as not needed for forest purposes)
b. Agricultural land reserved for a specific purpose (Sir’s example: Fort Bonifacio, those
reserved for military purposes)
c. Constitutional basis of disposability of land – Art 12 Sec 2
d. When is the land alienable and disposable:
Heirs of Malabanan: there must be an express declaration by the State that the public
dominion property is no longer intended for public service or the development of the
national wealth or that the property has been converted into patrimonial. Without such
express declaration, the property, even if classified as alienable or disposable, remains
property of the public dominion, pursuant to Article 420(2), and thus incapable of
acquisition by prescription. It is only when such alienable and disposable lands are
expressly declared by the State to be no longer intended for public service or for the
development of the national wealth that the period of acquisitive prescription can begin
to run. Such declaration shall be in the form of a law duly enacted by Congress or a
Presidential Proclamation in cases where the President is duly authorized by law.
e. Proofs to establish the alienability and disposability
- incontrovertible evidence must be presented to establish that the land subject of
the application is alienable or disposable.
Examples:
- a presidential proclamation or an executive order; other administrative actions;
investigation reports of the Bureau of Lands investigator; or a legislative act or
statute.
- secure a certification from the government that the lands applied for are alienable
and disposable.
- (1) CENRO or PENRO certification; and (2) a copy of the original classification
approved by the DENR Secretary and certified as a true copy by the legal custodian
 TD
 of the official records, in order to establish that the land is indeed alienable and
disposable
- Previously, a certification from the DENR that a lot was alienable and disposable
was sufficient to establish the true nature and character of the property and
enjoyed the presumption of regularity in the absence of contradictory evidence.
However, in Republic v. T.A.N. Properties, Inc., the Supreme Court overturned the
grant by the lower courts of an original application for registration over a parcel of
land in Batangas and ruled that a CENRO certification is not enough to certify that a
land is alienable and disposable:
NON-REGISTRABLE PROPERTIES
- Land intended for public use or service
- Laurel v Garcia: the executive department attempted to sell the Roppongi property
in Tokyo, Japan, which was acquired by the Philippine government for use as the
Chancery of the Philippine Embassy. Although the Chancery had transferred to
another location thirteen years earlier, the Court still ruled that, under Article 422
of the Civil Code, property of public dominion retains such character until formally
declared otherwise.
- Patrimonial property
a. Effect of registration of non-agricultural land – null and void
b. Lease of lands – wala lang pwede mag lease ng land
OPEN, CONTINUOUS, EXCLUSIVE, AND NOTORIOUS POSSESSION IN THE CONCEPT OF AN
OWNER SINCE JUNE 12, 1945, OR EARLIER
a. CA No. 141 v RA 1942 v PD 1073
b. Difference between Section 48(b) of CA No. 141 and Section 14(1) of PD 1529 – no
material difference – all states that it is required that the property sought to be
registered must be alienable and disposable at the time of application for registration
and before the bona fide claim chuchu
c. Proofs required to establish possession in the concept of an owner
 Overt acts of possession may consist in introducing valuable improvements on the
property, like fruit-bearing trees, fencing the area, constructing a residential house
thereon, and declaring the same for taxation purposes. Evidence to be admissible
must, however, be credible, substantial and satisfactory.
 Mere casual cultivation is not possession under claim of ownership, dapat
magtanim ay di biro for a long time
 Tax declarations – mere indicia of ownership, if coupled with title then it is good
evidence of ownership; but when not supported by other effective proof, they are
NOT EVIDENCE of the right of possession
 The possession of public land however long the period thereof may have extended,
never confers title thereto upon the possessor because the statute of limitations
with regard to public land does not operate against the State, unless the occupant
can prove possession and occupation of the same under claim of ownership for the
required number of years to constitute a grant from the State.
d. Tax Declarations
● Mere evidence of possession
Although tax declarations and realty tax payment of property are not conclusive evidence of
ownership, nevertheless, they are good indicia of the possession in the concept of owner for
no one in his right mind would be paying taxes for a property that is not in his actual or at
least constructive possession.
● Weak probative value
Tax receipts may not prevail as proof of “adverse” possession against one who is in actual
possession of property, but they constitute at least an indicia of possession.
● Exceptional cases where tax declarations facilitated the registration of land
Tax receipts or declarations of ownership, made for the purpose of taxation, when not
supported by other effective proof, are not evidence of the right of possession of realty; but
when the party claiming title presents a deed executed and delivered to him by the former
owner, the receipts and declarations constitute some proof showing the good faith on the
part of the person occupying and restraining possession of the property
REQUISITES OF SECTION 14(2) OF PD 1529
a. Private lands by prescription
- Sec 14(2): “those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription
under the provisions of existing laws.”
- this is the exception to “PRESCRIPTION DOES NOT RUN AGAINST THE STATE)
- because sec 14(2) specifically allows it – the law expressly allows it!
b. Concept of prescription under the Civil Code
Prescription is one of the modes of acquiring ownership under the Civil Code.
By prescription, one acquires ownership and other real rights through the lapse of time in the
manner and under the action laid down by law.
All things which are within the commerce of men are susceptible of prescription, unless
otherwise provided
 TD
Properties classified as alienable public land may be converted into private property by
ordinary prescription of ten years, or extraordinary prescription of thirty years, without need
of title or good faith.
c. Acquisitive prescription v Extinctive prescription
Acquisitive prescription of dominion and other real rights may be ordinary or extraordinary.
Ordinary acquisitive prescription requires possession of things in good faith and with just title
for the time fixed by law (10 yrs); as compared to extraordinary (30 yrs)
Extinctive: when rights and actions are lost through the lapse of time in the manner and
under the conditions laid down by law.
d. Patrimonial Property
Property of the State or any of its subdivisions not patrimonial in character shall not be the
object of prescription.
e. When does a public land become patrimonial property:
Article 422.
- Property of public dominion, when no longer intended for public use or for public
service, shall form part of the patrimonial property of the State.
- there must be a formal declaration by the executive or possibly legislative
department of the government that the property of the State is no longer needed
for public use of for public service; otherwise, the property continues to be
property of public dominion notwithstanding the fact that it is not actually devoted
for such use or service.
REQUISITES OF SECTION 14(3) of PD 1529
Sec. 14(3). Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or abandoned river beds by
right of accession or accretion under the existing laws.
Ownership by right of Accession
The requisites for the application of Article 61 are:
(a) The change must be sudden in order that the old river may be identified.
(b) The changing of the course must be more or less permanent, and not temporary
overflooding of another’s land.
(c) The change of the river must be a natural one, i.e., caused by natural forces (and not by
artificial means).
(d) There must be definite abandonment by the government. (If the government shortly after
the change decides and actually takes steps to bring the river to its old bed, Article 461 will
not apply for, here, it cannot be said that there was abandonment.)
Ownership by right of accretion:
(a) That the deposit be gradual and imperceptible;
(b) That it be made through the effects of the current of the water; and
(c) That the land where accretion takes place is adjacent to the banks of rivers.
REQUISITES OF SECTION 14(4) OF PD 1529
Sec. 14(4). Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner provided for by
law.
f. Reserving the public land for a specific purpose
a land grant having been made by a Presidential proclamation and by legislative act, the
grantee may apply for the registration of the land and bring it under the operation of the
Torrens system.
the law, as presently phrased, requires that possession of lands of the public domain must be
from June 12, 1945 or earlier, for the same to be acquired through judicial confirmation of
imperfect title.
III. JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION OF IMPERFECT TITLE
JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION OF IMPERFECT OR INCOMPLETE TITLE
a. Why is there a need to confirm an imperfect title
As a rule, no title or right to, or equity in, any lands of the public domain may be acquired by
prescription or by adverse possession or occupancy except as expressly provided by law.
The Public Land Act (CA No. 141) recognizes the concept of ownership under the civil law.
This ownership is based on adverse possession and the right of acquisition is governed by
judicial confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles.
THIRTEEN STEPS IN ORIGINAL LAND REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
1. SURVEY OF LAND
● Who approves the survey? LMB for original registration purposes.
 TD
 - It is required that the application for registration must be accompanied by a survey
plan of the land duly approved by the Director of Lands, together with the
claimant’s muniments of title to prove ownership
- No plan or survey may be admitted in land registration proceedings until approved
by the Director of Lands
- The primary purpose of the aforesaid requirement is to fix the exact or definite
identity of the land as shown in the plan and technical descriptions
- The LRA has no authority to approve original survey plans nor to check the
correctness thereof
- The clerk of court shall not accept application unless it is shown that the applicant
has furnished the Director of Lands with a copy of the application and annexes.
2. FILING OF APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION
That every person claiming any lands or interest in lands under Chapter VIII must in
every case present an application to the Regional Trial Court, praying that the validity of
the alleged title or claim be inquired into and that a certificate of title be issued to him
under the provisions of the Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529).
a. Where to file application for land registration
APPLICATION FOR LAND REGISTRATION TO BE FILED WITH THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
The RTC shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all applications for original registration of title
to lands, including improvements and interests therein, and over all petitioners filed after
original registration of title, with power to hear and determine all questions arising upon
such applications or petitions.
b. Instances when the MTC can handle land registration cases
The MTC or MCTC may be assigned to handle original registration cases in the following
instances as provided by RA7691:
o Where the lot is not the subject of any controversy or opposition
o Where the lot is contested but the value thereof doesn’t exceed P100,000
c. Appellate court in case of appeal – CA or SC – same as ordinary actions
d. Amendments to the application
Amendments to the application including joinder, substitution, or discontinuance as to
parties may be allowed by the court at any stage of the proceedings upon just and
reasonable terms
● Formal v Substantial
Where the amendment consists in a substantial change in the boundaries or increase in the
area of the land or involve the inclusion of additional area, the amendment shall be subject
to the same requirements of publication and notice as in the case of an original application
No amendments or alterations in the description of the land after its publication of new
notifications and advertisements making known to everyone the said alterations and
amendments.
3. SETTING THE DATE FOR INITIAL HEARING- within five (5) days from filing of the
application
the initial hearing shall not be earlier than forty-five (45) days nor later than ninety (90) days
from the date of the order.
Notice by means of PUBLICATION, MAILING, and POSTING is MANDATORY
The court has the power and duty to set the hearing date.
The notice of initial hearing is a court document—the party applicant has absolutely no
participation.
4. TRANSMITTAL OF APPLICATION AND DATE OF INITIAL HEARING TO THE LRA
Upon receipt of the order of the court setting the case for initial hearing, the LRA shall cause
the notice to be published once in the Official Gazette and once in a newspaper of general
circulation
5. PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF FILING OF APPLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE AND
NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION
● Purpose of publication
1. To confer jurisdiction upon the court over the res
2. To apprise the whole world of the pending registration case so that they may assert their
rights or interests in the land, if any, and oppose the application, if so minded.
THE PUBLICATION IN A NEWSPAPER IS NECESSARY TO ACCORD WITH DUE PROCESS
REQUIREMENT
THE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE DOESN'T DISPENSE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF
NOTICE BY MAILING AND POSTING
6. SERVICE OF NOTICE
 TD
 a. Indispensability of Notices – 3 modes strengthen the Torrens System
b. Publication – once in Official Gazette and once in newspaper of general circulation
Roxas v CA: Although jurisdiction of the court is not affected, the fact that publication was
not made in a newspaper of general circulation is material and relevant in the assessment of
the applicant’s right or title to the land.
Director of Lands v CA and Abistado: Publication in the OG confers jurisdiction upon the land
registration court. However, if not published in a newspaper of general circulation, the land
registration court CANNOT VALIDLY CONRIM and REGISTER TITLE.
Adez Realty v CA: not necessary to give personal notice to the owners or claimants of the
land In order to vest the courts with power over the land, the mere fact that a person
purporting to have a claim did not receive personal notice is not sufficient ground to
invalidate the proceedings.
c. Mailing – within 7 DAYS after publication LRA shall cause mailing to:
- Every person named in notice
- Sec. of Public Works & Highways & Provincial Governor and Mayor
- IF: it borders a river/waters/ tenant farmer claims/ government has
adverse claims
-Secretary of Agrarian Reform
-Solicitor General
-Director of Lands, of PubWorks and Communications, of Forest Land
Development, of Mines and GeoSciences, of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
Republic v CA and Maxino: the SolGen is the only legal counsel of the government in land
registration cases. He is entitled to be furnished copies of all court orders, notices and
decisions. Reglementary for appeal should be reckoned from the time OSG is apprised of the
decision not from the time the special counsel or prosecutor was served. No binding effect
on the government of SolGen not furnished with copies.
d. Posting – within 14 DAYS before initial hearing
- Shall be made in a conspicuous place on the land applied for and on the
bulletin board of the Municipality or City
Certification of the LRA Admin as to the fact of publication and mailing and sheriff as to
posting shall be made
Filing of an Answer by Oppositor
a. Order of Default
- General Default – no person appears and answers within the time allowed –
“To All Whom It May Concern” – addressed to the whole world
- Special Default – appearance has been entered and answer filed – directed
against those who did not enter their appearance and filed an answer
b. Effects of Default – presumed to have regularly performed its task in accordance
with law especially with regard to notice requirements
- All allegations contained in the application shall be held as confessed by
reason of the absence of contests
- Person who has not challenged cannot allege damage or error against the
judgment
- BUT: does not guarantee that the application will be granted, still has to
prove by “well-nigh incontrovertible proof”
EXCEPTION: acts of agents of the government shall not prejudice the government
c. Remedies in Case of Default – INTERLOCUTORY
- Before Judgment – motion to lift the order of general default
- After Judgment – can appeal if failed to prove the allegations, contrary to
law – NO NEED FOR PRIOR MOTION TO SET SIDE DEFAULT
- After Judgment becomes final and executory – regular courts ATA
Hearing the case by the court – registration proceedings must be disposed of within 90 DAYS
from date of submission for decision
a. Reference to a Referee – usually the branch clerk of court
- Hear the parties and evidence
- Submit report within 15 DAYS
- At any convenient place within the province or city
- Fixed by him
- After reasonable notice
- Court may render judgment based on referee’s report or set aside in whole
or in part and further proceedings
Judgment by the Court
-becomes final upon the expiration of 15 DAYS (previously 30)
-to be counted from date of receipt of notice of judgment
-APPEAL from final orders, resolutions, awards, judgments, or decisions of ANY COURT shall
be 15 DAYS counted from the notice of FORAJD – EXCEPT: habeas corpus cases – 48 HOURS
from notice
-provisions of Rules of Court not applicable here because NO FURTHER PROCEEDING is
needed to enforce judgment EXCEPT: ousting of adverse party in possession of the land
GOMEZ v CA: adjudication of land in a registration proceeding does not become final until
expiration of 1 year after the entry of the final decree of registration(LRA) – decision may
upon notice and hearing be still set aside, can be adjudicated to another with better right
a. Partial Judgment
-only a portion of the land is contested
-court may render partial judgment
 TD
-PROVIDED: subdivision plan showing the contested and uncontested portions approved by
the DIRECTOR OF LANDS is previously submitted
b. Effect of Dismissal
-judgment dismissing an application for registration does not constitute res judicata
-for ordinary civil case determining the ownership, recovery of property – RES JUDICATA
c. Writ of Possession – to enforce a judgment to recover the possession of land,
commands the sheriff to enter the land and give possession to the person entitled – can
be issued against everyone occupying the land
Serra v CA – WoP may be issued:
1) Land registration proceeding
2. Extrajudicial foreclosure of a realty mortgage
3. Judicial foreclosure of mortgage
4. Execution sales
Lucero v Loot – a writ of possession may be issued not only against the person who has been
defeated in a registration case but also against anyone adversely occupying the land or any
portion during the land registration proceedings – issuance of decree is supposed to end the
proceedings so ANY PERSON UNLAWLFULLY AND AVERSELY OCCUPYING – AT ANY TIME UP
TO THE ISSUANCE OF FINAL DECREE – may be subject to JUDICIAL EJECTMENT via WRIT OF
POSSESSION – duty of registration courts to issue
- The fact that petitioners have instituted more than a year after the decree an
ORDINARY ACTION attacking the decree on the ground of FRAUD – NOT A BAR to the
issuance of the writ of possession applied for by the registered owners
WILL NOT ISSUE:
- Already been issued at the instance of the applicant or his successors
- Occupation after the final decree and have not taken part in the proceeding [REMEDY:
unlawful entry/detainer, reivindicatoria]
- Reconstitution cases
d. Writ of Demolition – implies the delivery of possession of the land to the
successful litigant – sheriff specifically mandated not to destroy, demolish, or remove
improvements, EXCEPT upon SPECIAL ORDER of the court
Issuance of a Decree or Order by the court
a. Court orders the LRA – LRA admin and Director of Lands must submit to the court
all necessary and relevant evidence as well as reports to aid the court
- Court may directly require the DENR and Land Registration Authority to
submit a report if registered and covered by certs of title already
- Duty of the officials to render reports is not limited to period before court
decision – even after finality – but not beyond 1 yr from entry of decree
b. Issuance of Decree of Confirmation by the LRA - Upon the finality of the judgment of
the court adjudicating the land as private property, the court shall, within fifteen (15)
days from the entry thereof, issue an order directing the LRA Administrator to issue the
corresponding decree of registration and certificate of title. The Administrator shall then
prepare the decree of registration as well as the original and duplicate of the
corresponding certificate of title. The original certificate of title, signed by him, shall be a
true copy of the decree of registration, and shall be sent, together with the owner’s
duplicate certificate, to the Register of Deeds of the City or province where the land lies.
Entry of Decree of Registration in the LRA
- Under the signature of the Administrator, stating that the land described is
registered in the name of the applicant/ oppositor / claimant
Sending a Copy of the Decree to the Register of Deeds
- Under seal of the Administrator’s office
- To the RoD od he province or city where the land lies
- RoD transcribes the decree in the REGISTRATION BOOK: a leaf or leaves
devoted to each title
Transcription of the Decree in the Registry by the Register of Deeds
- Constitutes the ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, signed by RoD with seal of
office
- Any defect here is FORMAL not substantial
- LRA Administrator has no discretion anymore [REMEDY: refer matter to
court]
- Decree of Registration shall BIND THE LAND and QUIET TITLE
EXCEPT liens provided by law
- Conclusive against all persons including national government
a. Date of Issuance of Decree of Registration in the LRA v Date of transcription of the
Decree of Registration in the Register of Deeds
- Becomes registered land only upon the TRANSCRIPTION OF THE DECREE in
the OG registration book
- NOT on the DATE OF ISSUANCE of Decree of Registration
REMEDIES FROM JUDICIAL REGISTRATION OF TITLE
1. Certificate of Title: Decree binds the land and is conclusive against the whole
world
-shall bear the date, hour, and minute of its entry
-shall be signed by the LRA Administrator
-shall state whether owner is married or unmarried; if married the name of the spouse
also
-if land is conjugal, the decree shall be issued in the name of both spouses
-if under disability, state the nature of disability
 TD
-if minor, age
-contain description of the land
- set forth the estate of the owner, mortgages, easements, liens, attachments, and other
encumbrances to which the land or owner is subject
- decree shall BIND THE LAND and QUIET TITLE, subject only to liens provided by law
-CONCLUSIVE upon and against ALL PERSONS including the GOVERNMENT
- as soon as DECREE OF TITLE has been registered in the RoD, the property shall become
REGISTERED LAND
-the certificate shall take effect upon the date of the transcription of the decree
When it becomes inconvertible:
Section 32. - Review of decree of registration; Innocent purchaser for value. The decree
of registration shall not be reopened or revised by reason of absence, minority, or other
disability of any person adversely affected thereby, nor by any proceeding in any court
for reversing judgments, subject, however, to the right of any person, including the
government and the branches thereof, deprived of land or of any estate or interest
therein by such adjudication or confirmation of title obtained by actual fraud, to file in
the proper Court of First Instance a petition for reopening and review of the decree of
registration not later than one year from and after the date of the entry of such decree
of registration, but in no case shall such petition be entertained by the court where an
innocent purchaser for value has acquired the land or an interest therein, whose rights
may be prejudiced. Whenever the phrase "innocent purchaser for value" or an
equivalent phrase occurs in this Decree, it shall be deemed to include an innocent
lessee, mortgagee, or other encumbrancer for value.
Upon the expiration of said period of one year, the decree of registration and the
certificate of title issued shall become incontrovertible. Any person aggrieved by such
decree of registration in any case may pursue his remedy by action for damages against
the applicant or any other persons responsible for the fraud.
PURCHASER IN GOOD FAITH: one who buys the property of another without notice that
some other person has a right or interest in it, and pays a full and fair price at the time
of the purchase or before receiving any notice of another person’s claim.
Good faith: seller is the registered owner + in possession of the land + at the time of sale
the buyer was unaware of any claim/interest/capacity to convey title
- a question of fact
- burden of proof is upon one who asserts that status
-purchaser not required to explore further than what the title indicates for hidden
defects [exception: when the party has actual knowledge]
-charged only with notice of liens noted on the title
-one who has knowledge of defect can’t claim GD
-between two persons in GF, the lawful holder of a title is preferred
- rule of CAVEAT EMPTOR “buyer beware” – one who purchase property which is in
actual possession of others should at least make some inquiry concerning the rights of
those in possession
 Probative value of certification of title
- serves as evidence of an indefeasible and incontrovertible title after the lapse or
expiration of 1 year from the date of entry of the decree of registration.
- conclusive as to the person whose name appears therein, the identity of the land,
and its location
- strong presumption of its validity and regularity
- person who has a Torrens title has right to possess and to eject any person illegally
occupying
- person only has to rely on the title of his predecessor-in-interest
-BUT: while cert of title is indefeasible, unassailable and binding against the whole
world, it DOES NOT CREATE OR VEST TITLE, just confirms or records title already
existing and vested
Section 51. Conveyance and other dealings by registered owner. An owner of registered land
may convey, mortgage, lease, charge or otherwise deal with the same in accordance with
existing laws. He may use such forms of deeds, mortgages, leases or other voluntary
instruments as are sufficient in law. But no deed, mortgage, lease, or other voluntary
instrument, except a will purporting to convey or affect registered land shall take effect as a
conveyance or bind the land, but shall operate only as a contract between the parties and as
evidence of authority to the Register of Deeds to make registration.
The act of registration shall be the operative act to convey or affect the land insofar
as third persons are concerned, and in all cases under this Decree, the registration
shall be made in the office of the Register of Deeds for the province or city where
the land lies.
REQUISITES:
1. Consent of the contracting parties
2. Object certain which is the subject matter of the contract
3. Cause of the obligation which is established
Direct attack (assailing the validity directly) v collateral attack ( incidental)
 TD
DA: deemed an attack on a title when the object of the action or proceeding is to nullify the
title, and thus challenge the judgment pursuant to which the title was decreed; may be made
in a counterclaim or third-party complaint
CA: in an action to obtain a different relief, an attack on the judgment is nevertheless made
as an incident thereof
DIFFERENT REMEDIES OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES WHEN AN ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
IS ISSUED
1. Motions for New Trial and Reconsideration
 Set aside the judgment or final order and grant a new trial
 Must show substantial rights affected
 If new trial granted – judgment set aside
 If MR – judgment is amended
 PERIOD: within the period for TAKING, NOT PERFECTING an appeal
 Within 15 days after notice to appellant of the judgment
 If record on appeal required: 30 days after notice
GROUNDS:
 Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence (which ordinary prudence could not
have guarded against and by reason of which such aggrieved party has probably been
impaired in his rights) - FAME
 Newly discovered evidence which he could not with reasonable diligence, have
discovered and produced at the trial, and which if presented, WOULD PROBABLY ALTER
THE RESULT
 Damages are excessive, evidence is insufficient to justify the decision, decision is
contrary to law
CONTENTS:
 In writing stating the grounds
 Written notice served by the movant on the adverse party
 Shall be proved in the same manner for PROOF OF MOTIONS
 For FAME: need affidavits of merits – may be rebutted by COUNTER-AFFIDAVITS
 For NEWLY DISCOVERED EVID - need affidavit of witnesses by whom such evidence is
expected to be given / duly authenticated documents
 MR: point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the judgment which are not
supported by evidence/contrary o law; with express reference to the testimonial or
documentary evidence or the provisions of law alleged to be contrary to such findings
 Pro forma motion – shall NOT TOLL REGLEMENTARY PERIOD
 No extension of time to file
IN RE AFIIDAVITS:
For FAME: Should be accompanied by 2 affidavits: 1. setting forth the facts and
circumstances alleged to constitute such fraud accident mistake or negligence; & 2. particular
facts claimed to constitute movants meritorious cause of action
- Affidavits not necessary if demandable as right – where movant has been
deprived of his day in court
2. Appeal to the CA or SC – within 15 days from receipt of notice
NO APPEAL:
 Order denying motion for new trial/reconsideration
 Order denying petition for relief
 Interlocutory order
 Order disallowing or dismissing an appeal
 Order denying motion to set aside a judgment by consent, confession, or
compromise (FAM+duress)
 Order of execution
 Judgment or final order in separate claims etch while main case is PENDING –
unless court allows
 Order dismissing an action without prejudice
REMEDY: Rule 65
MODES OF APPEAL:
 Ordinary appeal – appeal to the CA in cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
 File a notice of appeal with the court which rendered the judgment and
serving a copy upon the adverse party
 No record on appeal required except in special proceedings and other cases of
multiple or separate appeals where its required
 PERIOD: within 15 days from notice of the judgment or final order appealed
from; record on appeal: 30 days from notice of judgment or final order
 Shall be interrupted by a timely motion for NT/Recon
 No motion for extension of time shall be allowed
 PERFECTION OF APPEAL:
NoA: deemed perfected as to him upon filing of the notice of appeal in due
time; court loses jurisdiction upon perfection of the appeals + expiration of
the time to appeal of other parties
RoA: upon approval of the RoA filed in due time; court loses jurisdiction upon
approval of the Roa + expiration of the time to appeal of other parties
 Petition for review (Rule 42)– appeal to the CA in cases decided by the RTC in the
exercises of APPELLATE JURISDICTION
 Appeal by certiorari (Rule 45) – appeal to the SC - only questions of law are raised
or involved
3. RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
 TD
  within 60 days after petitioner learns of the judgment and not more than 6
months after judgment entered + must be accompanied by affidavits showing
FAME + facts
 Date of finality of judgment: date of its entry
 Can only be availed of: decision has become final and executory and when
new trial is not available
 Final – nothing more to be done
 Grounds: FAME
 Petition for relief and motion for NT/Recon are EXCLUSIVE of each other aka a
party who has filed a motion for NT cannot file a petition for relief after his
motion has been denied
4. PETITION FOR REVIEW OF DECREE OF REGISTRATION:
Eland PH v Garcia: courts may reopen proceedings already closed by final decision or
decree when an application for review filed by the party aggrieved within 1 year from
issuance of decree of registration. But BASIS must be solely on ACTUAL FRAUD
· Period of filing – as long as a final decree has not been entered by the
LRA AND 1 year has not elapsed from the date of entry of such decree –
petition may be filed at ANY TIME after the rendition of the courts
decision before expiration of 1 year ??????
Grounds: fraud must be actual or extrinsic
Actual and Extrinsic Fraud [any fraudulent act of the successful party in litigation which is
committed outside the trial of the case – party defeated is prevented from presenting fully
and fairly his side – the fraud that would justify review of a decree of registration must be
ACTUAL – an intentional concealment or omission of a fact required by law to be stated –
calculated to deceive or deprive another of his legal rights] v Intrinsic Fraud [ acts of a party
during the trial like forgery etc which did not affect the presentation of the case + goes into
the merits of the case]
Republic v Lozada: appellant and husband clearly guilty of fraud: 1. In not disclosing in her
application for registration the vital facts that her husband’s previous application for
revocable permit and to purchase the lands had been rejected because the lands were
already reserved as a site for school purposes; 2. Concealing the fact that the lands were part
of the public domain and known to them; 3. In deliberately stating that the lands were
inherited by her from her parents; 4. In filing the application for registration in her name,
suppressing the rejected previous application, ALL OF WHICH MISLED BUREAU OF LANDS into
NOT FILING A OPPOSITION to her application
- Although can be considered intrinsic, the mistake that misled the officials of
the bureau of lands will not operate to bar the State from any action
- PRESUPPOSES: within a year / before land has fallen into the hands of an
innocent purchaser
5. Action for Reconveyance – granted to the rightful owner of land which has been
wrongfully registered in the name of another
- purpose of reconveying the land to him
- available not only to the legal owner but to the person with a better right
- does not reopen but to show na not real owner
- action in personam
- after 1 year from the date of decree, REMEDY: not to set aside the decree, RESPECT
THE INCONTROVERTIBILITY and bring an ORDINARY ACTION in the ORDINARY COURT OF
JUTICE for RECONVEYANCE or if it has already passed to the hands of an innocent
purchaser for value: for DAMAGES
-burden of proof: clear and convincing evidence
-may be barred by prescription
· Grounds: EWAN WALA POTA DI KO MAHANAP
· Requisites:
1. action must be brought in the name of a person claiming ownership
2. registration of the land was procured through fraud or other illegal
means
3. property has not yet passed to an innocent purchaser for value
4. action is filed after the certificate of title had already become final
and incontrovertible but within 4 years from discovery of fraud
· Different periods to file
1. action based on fraud – 4 years
2. based on implied trust – 10 years
3. void contract – imprescriptible
4. where plaintiff is in possession – imprescriptible
Cabrera v. CA: where the plaintiff is in possession of the property, the action
for reconveyance is not time-barred. Citing Heirs of Jose Olviga v CA “an action
for reconveyance of a parcel of land based on implied or constructive trust
prescribes in 10 years, the point of reference being the date of registration of
the deed or the date of the issuance of the cert of title over the property, but
this rule applies only when plaintiff or the person enforcing the trust is not in
possession of the property, since if a person claiming to be the owner thereof
is in actual possession, the right to seek reconveyance, which in effect seeks
to quiet title to the property, does not prescribe. The reason is that one who is
in actual possession of a piece of land claiming to be the owner thereof may
wait until his possession is disturbed or his title is attacked before taking steps
to vindicate his right, the reason for the rule being that his undisturbed
possession gives him a continuing right to seek the aid of a court of equity to
ascertain and determine the nature of the adverse claim of a third party and
 TD
 its effect on his own title, which right can be claimed only be one who is in
possession.
- Laches and res judicata may bar doe
6. Action for compensation from Assurance Fund
- Requisites
1. Loss or damage + no negligence on his part + omission/mistake of
the court personnel or Registry
2. Deprived of any land or interest + no negligence on his part +
deprived as consequence of the provisions of Prop Reg Decree /
registration of another + he is barred from bringing an action
- Period to file claim – 6 years from time the right first occurred
- Indispensable partiesL against reg of deeds of the province or city where
land is and the NATIONAL TREASURER as defendant
- Condition sine qua non- person who brings action is the registered owner
7. Action for Damages – when already passed to innocent buyer
- When to file – within 10 years from date of issuance of certificate of title
8. Annulment of judgment
- Grounds: 2: EXTRINSIC FRAUD and LACK OF JURIS/ DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
- ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other
appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of petitioner
- Quasi judicial tribunals or admin bodies like nlrc and darab – not susceptible
for annulment under this rule
- Extrinsic fraud – 4 years
- Lack of juris or denial of due process – before barred by laches or estoppel
- When to file
9. Quieting of Title – proceeding in rem
- Grounds: cloud, action to remove cloud, does not transfer title, in real
property by reason of instruments docs, one is disturbed
- When to file: KUNG KELAN MO FEEL
10. Cancellation Suits
- When is it availed- 2 titles is issued to diff persons same lot, one is superior
to the other, does not revert to the mass of the public domain, just declares
lawfully belonging to the party with superior title
11. Action for reversion – restore public land fraudulently awarded and disposed to
private individuals or corporations, to the State –
- Often designated as: annulment suit or cancellation suit
- Instituted by the government through the SolGen
· Grounds:
- all cases where lands of the public domain and the improvements thereon
and all lands are held in violation of the Constitution
- cases of fraudulent or unlawful inclusion of land in patents or certificates of
title
- void for reasons other than fraud, ie. Violation by the grantee of a patent of
the conditions, lack of jurisdiction to grant, mere oversight
-alienations of land acquired under free patent or homestead in violation of
xxx
- conveyances made by non-Christians in violation of xxx
- alienations of lands acquired under x in favor of persons not qualified under
sections xxx
- Who avails of an action for reversion – only the SolGen or the officer acting
in his stead in behalf of the RPh
12. Criminal Action – state may prosecute for perjury the party who obtains
registration through fraud, a proceeding in personam
VI. CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
1. Original Certificate of Title
a. Review of its issuance
- After judgment directing the registration of title to land, the court (within 15 days from
ENTRY OF JUDGMENT), shall issue an order directing the LRA commissioner (now
Administrator) to issue the corresponding decree of registration and certificate of title
- The clerk of court shall send (within 15 days from ENTRY OF JUDGMENT, certified copies of
the judgment and order of the court to the commissioner, as well as a certificate stating that
the decision has not been amended, reconsidered, nor appealed, and has become final
- The LRA Administrator shall prepare the decree of Registration as well as the ORIGINAL
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE and duplicate of the certificate
- The OCT shall be a true copy of the decree of registration
- The decree of registration shall be signed by the Adminsitrator, entered and filed in the LRA
- The OCT shall also be signed by the Administrator and shall be sent, together with the
owner’s duplicate certificate to the Register of Deeds of the city or province where the
property is situated for ENTRY IN HIS REGISTRATION BOOK
Manotok Realty: The entry made by the Register of Deeds in said book constitutes the
Original Certificate of Title, numbered, dated, signed, and sealed with the seal of his office,
shall take effect upon the date of entry thereof
 THE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF TITLE is the TRANSCRIPT OF THE DECREE OF
REGISTRATION made by the Register of Deeds
b. Proper repository – ROD
c. Registration Book - The original copy of the original certificate of title shall be filed
in the Registry of Deeds. The same shall be bound in consecutive order together
with similar certificates of title and shall constitute the registration book for titled
properties.
 TD
 2. Owner’s Duplicate Certificate of Title
a. When issued to the owner
- upon entry by the Register of Deeds of the original and duplicate copy in the record book,
the RoD shall then send notice by mail to the registered owner informing him that his
owner’s duplicate is ready for delivery upon payment of proper fees
- duplicate shall be delivered to the registered owner/duly authorized representative
- if 2 or more persons are registered owners, one owner’s duplicate may be issued for the
whole land
- or a separate duplicate may be issued to each of them
- all outstanding certs must be surrendered whenever the RoD shall register any subsequent
voluntary transection affecting the whole land or part/interest
-RoD shall note on each cert a statement as to whom a copy thereof was issued
- the duplicate certs of title may either be DUPLICATE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE or DUPLICATE
TRANSFER CERTIFICATE
- surrender of owner’s duplicate is conclusive authority for the RoD to enter a new certificate
or a memorandum of registration
However: Development Bank of the Philippines v. Acting Register of Deeds of Nueva Ecija
(1988): current doctrine thus seems to be that entry alone produces the effect of
registration, whether the transaction entered is a voluntary or involuntary one, so long as the
registrant has complied with all that is required of him for purposes of entry and annotation,
and nothing more remains to be done but a duty incumbent solely on the register of deeds
Reiterated in NHA v BASA (2010): there is effective registration once the registrant has
fulfilled all that is needed of him for purposes of entry and annotation, so that what is left to
be accomplished lies solely on the RoD.
b. Importance of possession of Owner’s Duplicate Certificate
- The owner of the land in whose favor and in whose name land is registered and inscribed in
the certificate of title has preferential right to the possession of the owner’s duplicate as
against one whose name does not appear in the certificate
Abad v CA: where private respondents contended that they have a better right to the
property since they have occupied and are presently in possession of the same, it was held
that mere possession cannot defeat the title of a holder of a registered Torrens title to real
property. Such title is entitled to respect and great weight until somebody else could show a
better right to the property.
3. Imprescriptibility and Incontestability of Certificate
a. Collateral Attack v Direct Attack
- An action is deemed an attack on a title when the object of the action or proceeding is to
nullify the title, and thus challenge the judgment pursuant to which the title was decreed
- The attack is direct when the object of the action is to annul or set aside such judgment, or
enjoin its enforcement.
- On the other hand, the attack is indirect or collateral when, in an action to obtain a different
relief, an attack on the judgment is nevertheless made as an incident thereof
- Section 48 of the Property Registration Decree expressly provides that a certificate of title
cannot be subject to collateral attack. It can be altered, modified or cancelled only in a
direct proceeding
- A “direct attack” on the title may be made in a counterclaim or third-party complaint.
Magay v. Estiandan: where plaintiff bought from her mother-in-law a piece of land on which
defendant had constructed two houses. After acquiring the property, plaintiff wrote
defendant asking him to vacate the premises, but he refused. Plaintiff sued defendant.
Defendant questioned the validity of the title of plaintiff’s predecessor for having been
allegedly acquired under anomalous circumstances. The lower court found for the plaintiff.
On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment based on the principle that a Torrens
title cannot be collaterally attacked.
“It is well-settled that a Torrens title cannot be collaterally attacked. The issue on the validity
of the title can only be raised in an action expressly instituted for that purpose. Even
assuming that the land in question is still part of the public domain, then the appellant is not
the proper party to institute the reversion of the land but it must be the Solicitor General in
the name of the Republic of the Philippines.”
4. Constructive notice upon registration
a. Section 52 of PD No. 1529
SEC. 52. Constructive notice upon registration. — Every conveyance, mortgage, lease, lien,
attachment, order, judgment, instrument or entry affecting registered land shall, if
registered, filed or entered in the office of the Register of Deeds for the province or city
where the land to which it relates lies, be constructive notice to all persons from the time of
such registering, filing or entering.
Registration is constructive notice to third persons.
Purchaser is not required to explore further than what title indicates for hidden defects.
But a purchaser who has knowledge of defect of his vendor’s title cannot claim good faith.
As between the parties to a contract of sale, registration is not necessary to make it valid and
effective, for actual notice is equivalent to registration. Section 51 of the Property
Registration Decree provides that, even without the act of registration, a deed purporting to
convey or affect registered land shall operate as a contract between the parties. The
registration is intended to protect the buyer against claims of third persons arising from
subsequent alienations by the vendor, and is certainly not necessary to give effect to the
deed of sale, as between the parties to the contract.
5. Mirror Doctrine or Curtain Principle: a person dealing with a registered land has a right
to rely upon the face of the Torrens certificate of title and to dispense with the need of
 TD
 inquiring further, except when the party concerned has actual knowledge of facts and
circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious man to make inquiry.
6. Subdivision and consolidation of certificate
a. Section 108 of PD No. 1529
Where to file petition.
- Under Section 108 of the Decree, all petitions or motions after original registration shall be
filed and entitled in the original case in which the decree of registration was entered.
Said section does not require that the petition or the answer or opposition thereto be under
oath.
- Land registration proceedings are as separate and distinct from ordinary civil actions as are
the latter from criminal actions. The rule that “all petitions or motions” filed under Section
108 as well as under any other provision of the Property Registration Decree after original
registration shall be filed and entitled in the original registration case was adopted with an
intelligent purpose in view — to allow such petitions and motions to be filed and disposed of
elsewhere would eventually lead to confusion and render it difficult to trace the origin of
the entries in the registry.
Proceedings under Sec. 112 of the Land Registration Act were summary in nature.
Rule under Sec. 108, in relation to Sec. 2, PD No. 1529: court may now hear both contentious
and non-contentious cases.
No amendment or alteration of decree is permitted except upon order of the court.
No time limit to file petition.
Cases:
1. Abad v CA: where private respondents contended that they have a better right to
the property since they have occupied and are presently in possession of the same,
it was held that mere possession cannot defeat the title of a holder of a registered
Torrens title to real property. Such title is entitled to respect and great weight until
somebody else could show a better right to the property.
2. Guaranteed Homes v Valdez: Mere possession cannot defeat the title of a holder of
a registered torrens title to real property.— With regard to the contention of
private respondents that they have a better right to the property since they have
occupied and are presently in possession of the same, it is but proper to reiterate
the well-established rule that mere possession cannot defeat the title of a holder of
a registered torrens title to real property. It is indeed questionable that up to now,
private respondents merely have in their possession a deed of absolute sale
executed way back in 1972 to evidence their claim of ownership. Petitioners, on
the other hand, have the affidavit proving their right as co-owner of the lot, their
adverse claim annotated at the back of the torrens title of Aquino, and a final
judgment in their favor. The transfer certificate of title covering the disputed lot is
now in the name of petitioner spouses. Such title is entitled to respect and great
weight until somebody else can show a better right to the lot.
3. Magay v Estiandan *
4. Locsin v Hizon: The mirror doctrine echoes the doctrinal rule that every person
dealing with registered land may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of
title issued therefor and is in no way obliged to go beyond the certificate to
determine the condition of the property.—Complementing this is the mirror
doctrine which echoes the doctrinal rule that every person dealing with registered
land may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of title issued therefor and
is in no way obliged to go beyond the certificate to determine the condition of the
property. The recognized exceptions to this rule are stated as follows: [A] person
dealing with registered land has a right to rely on the Torrens certificate of title and
to dispense with the need of inquiring further except when the party has actual
knowledge of facts and circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious man
to make such inquiry or when the purchaser has knowledge of a defect or the lack
of title in his vendor or of sufficient facts to induce a reasonably prudent man to
inquire into the status of the title of the property in litigation. The presence of
anything which excites or arouses suspicion should then prompt the vendee to look
beyond the certificate and investigate the title of the vendor appearing on the face
of said certificate. One who falls within the exception can neither be denominated
an innocent purchaser for value nor a purchaser in good faith and, hence, does not
merit the protection of the law.
VII. SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION: VOLUNTARY DEALINGS
1. Voluntary v Involuntary Dealings
Voluntary and involuntary registration distinguished.
The earlier ruling that the mere entry of a document in the day or entry book without noting
it on the certificate of title is not a sufficient registration
has been superseded by the holding in the later cases of:
Levin v. Bass, etc., where a distinction was made between voluntary and involuntary
registration, such as the registration of an attachment, levy upon execution, notice of lis
pendens, and the like. In cases of involuntary registration, an entry thereof in the day book is
a sufficient notice to all persons even if the owner’s duplicate certificate of title is not
presented to the Register of Deeds. On the other hand, in case of voluntary registration of
documents, an innocent purchaser for value of registered land becomes the registered
owner, and, in contemplation of law the holder of a certificate of title, the moment he
presents and files a duly notarized and valid deed of sale and the same is entered in the day
book and at the same time he surrenders or presents the owner’s duplicate certificate of title
 TD
 covering the land sold and pays the registration fees, because what remains to be done lies -
not within his power to perform. The Register of Deeds is duty bound to perform it.
2. Importance of registration of subsequent transfer of land
- It is tradition or delivery, as a consequence of sale, that actually transfers ownership.
- (1) actual delivery; and (2) legal or constructive delivery.
a. Effect of non-registration of transfer
As between the parties to a sale, registration is not necessary to make it valid and effective,
for actual notice is equivalent to registration.28
Where no right of innocent third persons is involved, the conveyance between the vendee
and his vendors, although not registered, is valid and binding upon the latter as well as upon
his heirs.
The sale of registered land becomes legally effective against third persons only from the date
of its registration.
b. Transfer of land through an agent
When a sale of a piece of land or any interest therein is through an agent, the authority of
the latter shall be in writing; otherwise, the sale shall be void.
A special power to sell excludes the power to mortgage, and a special power to mortgage
does not include the power to sell.
3. Process of voluntary transfer of land
a. Surrender of owner’s duplicate certificate of title
No voluntary instrument shall be registered by the RoD unless the owner’s duplicate
certificate is presented together with such instrument, except in some cases or upon order of
the court for cause shown.
To affect the land sold, the presentation of the deed of sale and its entry in the day book
must be done with the surrender of the owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title.
b. Primary entry book or day book: The primary entry book is a record of all instruments,
including copies of writs and processes, affecting registered lands, which are entered by
the Register of Deeds in the order of their filing, upon payment of the proper fees. The
recording is a preliminary process in registration and shall note the date, hour and
minute of receipt of said instruments. An instrument shall be regarded as registered
only from the time it is so noted.
- Every deed or instrument, whether voluntary or involuntary, shall be numbered and endorsed
by the Register of Deeds with proper reference to the certificate of title.
- All records and papers relative to registered land shall be open for examination by the public,
subject to such reasonable regulations as the Register of Deeds may prescribe.
All deeds and voluntary instruments and copies thereof shall be attested and sealed by the
Register of Deeds and copies with the corresponding file number shall be delivered to the
person presenting them.
- “an innocent purchaser for value of registered land becomes the registered owner and in the
contemplation of law the holder of a certificate thereof the moment he presents and files a duly
notarized and lawful deed of sale and the same is entered on the day book and at the same time
he surrenders or presents the owner’s duplicate certificate of title to the property sold and pays
the full amount of registration fees, because what remains to be done lies not within his power
to perform.”
c. Carry-over of encumbrances: Whenever registered land is conveyed, all subsisting
encumbrances or annotations appearing in the registration book and noted on the
certificate of title shall be carried over and noted on the new certificate of title except
where said encumbrances or annotations are simultaneously released or discharged.
Purpose: to show that the grantee obtained the land or portion thereof subject to subsisting
encumbrances attached to the title of his grantor.
4. Liens
a. Meaning of lien:
- a charge on property usually for the payment of some debt or obligation.
- a qualified right or a proprietary interest, which may be exercised over the property of
another.
- a right which the law gives to have a debt satisfied out of a particular thing.
- signifies a legal claim or charge on property, either real or personal, as a collateral or
security for the payment of some debt or obligation.
- An “encumbrance is a burden upon land, depreciative of its value, such as a lien, easement,
or servitude, which, though adverse to the interest of the landowner, does not conflict with
his conveyance of the land in fee.”
Example: A claim, lien, charge, or liability attached to and binding upon real property, e.g., a
mortgage, judgment lien, lease, security interest, easement or right of way, accrued and
unpaid taxes.
A lien is already an existing burden or charge on the property.
A notice of lis pendens, as the very term connotes, does not establish a “lien” but is only a
notice or warning that a claim or possible charge on the property is pending determination
by the court.
b. Certificate of title free from liens except those noted thereon
- every registered owner receiving a certificate of title issued pursuant to a decree of
registration and every subsequent purchaser of registered land for value and in good faith
shall hold the same free from all encumbrances.
 TD
 Excepted are:
(a) those noted in the certificate of title, and
(b) the encumbrances enumerated in the law.
The following may limit the registered owners’ absolute title over the property:
(1) Liens, claims or rights existing or arising under the laws or the Constitution which are not
by law required to appear of record in the Registry of Deeds;
(2) Unpaid real estate taxes levied and assessed within two years immediately preceding the
acquisition of any right over the land;
(3) Any public highway or private way established or recognized by law, or any government
irrigation canal or lateral thereof;
(4) Any disposition of the property or limitation on the use thereof by virtue of PD No. 27 or
any other law or regulation on agrarian reform;
(5) Rights incident to the relation of husband and wife, and landlord and tenant;
(6) Liability to attachment or levy on execution;
(7) Liability to any lien of any description established by law on the land and the buildings
thereon, or on the interest of the owner on such lands and buildings;
(8) Rights incident to the laws of descent or partition between co-owners;
(9) Taking of the property through eminent domain;
(10) Right to relieve the land from liability to be recovered by an assignee in insolvency or
trustee in bankruptcy under the laws relative to preferences; and
(11) Rights or liabilities created by law and applicable to unregistered land
c. Types of lien
 Superior lien in favor of government
 Unpaid real estate taxes
 Public highway
 Tenant emancipation decree
 Carp
 Public land patents
 Other statutory liens
d. Priority of liens
5. Dealings less than ownership
SEC. 54. Dealings less than ownership, how registered. — No new certificate shall be entered
or issued pursuant to any instrument which does not divest the ownership or title from the
owner or from the transferee of the registered owners.
All interests in registered land less than ownership shall be registered by: filing with the
Register of Deeds the instrument which creates or transfers or claims such interests and by a
brief memorandum thereof made by the Register of Deeds upon the certificate of title, and
signed by him.
- A similar memorandum shall also be made on the owner’s duplicate
- The cancellation or extinguishment of such interests shall be registered in the same manner.
a. Registration of encumbrances: At the dorsal side of a certificate of title is a
memorandum of encumbrances affecting the property. It is here that all interests in
registered land less than ownership ex. Contract to sell
b. Registration of lease: Upon presentation for registration of the deed of mortgage or
lease together with the owner’s duplicate the RoD shall enter upon the original of the
certificate of title and also upon the owner’s duplicate certificate a memorandum
thereof, the date and time of filing and the file number assigned to the deed, and shall
sign the said memorandum.
- He shall also note on the deed the date and time of filing and a reference to the volume and
page of the registration book in which it is registered.
c. Foreclosure of mortgage: Foreclosure is the process by which a mortgagee acquires an
absolute title to the property of which he had previously been only the conditional
owner, or upon which he had previously a mere lien or encumbrance.
Foreclosure is valid where the debtors are in default in the payment of their obligation.
Cases:
1. Levin v. Bass*
2. DBP v. Register of Deeds: View that the Register’s act of making a primary entry as
a preliminary process in registration fails to find support from a consideration of
entire context of Section 56; Neither is the implication in the appealed resolution
that annotation must follow entry immediately.—That view fails to find support
from a consideration of entire context of said Section 56 which in another part also
provides that the instrument subject of a primary entry “x x x shall be regarded as
registered from the time so noted x x x,” and, at the very least, gives such entry
from the moment of its making the effect of putting the whole world on notice of
the existence the instrument so entered. Such effect (of registration) clearly
attaches to the mere making of the entry without regard to the subsequent step of
annotating a memorandum of the instrument subject of the entry on the certificate
of title to which it refers. Indeed, said Section, in also providing that the
annotation, “x x x when made x x x shall bear the same date x x x” as the entry, may
be said to contemplate unspecified intervals of time occurring between the making
of a primary entry and that of the corresponding annotation on the certificate of
title without robbing the entry of the effect of being equivalent to registration.
Neither, therefore, is the implication in the appealed resolution that annotation
must follow entry immediately or in short order justified by the language of Section
56.
It is amply clear that the four-year hiatus between primary entry and proposed annotation in
this case has not been of DBP’s making.
All the requisites for purposes of both primary entry and annotation were complied with by
the DBP.
 TD
Current doctrines seems to be that entry alone produces the effect of registration so long as
the requisites are complied with.
Therefore, without necessarily holding that annotation of a primary entry on the original of
the certificate of title may be deferred indefinitely without prejudice to the legal effect of
said entry, the Court rules that in the particular situation here obtaining, annotation of the
disputed entry on the reconstituted originals of the certificates of title to which it refers is
entirely proper and justified. To hold said entry “ineffective,” as does the appealed
resolution, amounts to declaring that it did not, and does not, protect the registrant (DBP)
from claims arising, or transactions made, thereafter which are adverse to or in derogation of
the rights created or conveyed by the transaction thus entered. That, surely, is a result that is
neither just nor can, by any reasonable interpretation of Section 56 of PD 1529 be asserted
as warranted by its terms.
3. Gonzales v. IAC: A bank is not required, before accepting a mortgage, to make an
investigation of the title of the property being given as security. Nevertheless,
banks are cautioned to exercise more care and prudence in dealing even with
registered lands than private individuals, for their business is one affected with
public interest, keeping in trust money belonging to their depositors, which they
should guard against loss by not committing any act of negligence which amounts
to lack of good faith. Thus, banks before approving a loan send representatives to
the premises of the land offered as collateral and investigate who are the true
owners thereof.
VIII. SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION: INVOLUNTARY DEALINGS
1. Involuntary dealings in land
2. Attachment
a. Nature: Attachment is the legal process of seizing another’s property in accordance with
a writ or judicial order for the purpose of securing satisfaction of a judgment yet to be
rendered. The writ of attachment is used primarily to seize the debtor’s property in
order to secure the debt or claim of the creditor in the event that a judgment is
rendered
- levy upon execution, lis pendens and the like, the entry thereof in the day book is a
sufficient notice to all persons of such adverse claim.
- annotated on the back of the corresponding original certificate of title
- shall be filed and registered in the Registry of Deeds
- shall contain a reference to the number of the certificate of title to be affected, the
registered owner thereof and a description of the land or interest therein
b. Grounds for attachment
(a) In an action to recover the possession of property unjustly or fraudulently taken, detained
or converted, when the property, or any part thereof, has been concealed, removed, or
disposed of to prevent its being found or taken by the applicant or an authorized person;
(b) In action against a party who has been guilty of fraud in contracting the debt or incurring
the obligation upon which the action is brought, or in the performance thereof; and
(c) In an action against a party who has removed or disposed of his property, or is about to
do so, with intent to defraud his creditors.
A preliminary attachment may be validly applied for and granted ex parte before the
defendant is summoned since the phrase “at the commencement of the action” refers to the
date of the filing of the complaint and before summons is served on the defendant.
c. Difference of:
Attachment: seizing another’s property in accordance with a writ or judicial order for the
purpose of securing satisfaction of a judgment yet to be rendered
Garnishment: Garnishment is the levy of money, goods, or chattels, and/or an interest
thereon, belonging or owing to a losing party in the possession or control of a third party.
Levy: Levy is the act of taking possession and control by the sheriff or proper officer of
sufficient property of the losing party to satisfy the decision, order, or award.
3. Adverse Claim
a. Definition: Adverse claim. — Whoever claims any part or interest in registered
land adverse to the registered owner, arising subsequent to the date of the
original registration.
b. Purpose: The purpose of annotating the adverse claim on the title of the
disputed land is to apprise third persons that there is a controversy over the
ownership of the land and to preserve and protect the right of the adverse
claimant during the pendency of the controversy. It is a notice to third persons
that any transaction regarding the disputed land is subject to the outcome of
the dispute.
c. Registration of adverse claim: The annotation of an adverse claim is a measure
designed to protect the interest of a person over a piece of real property
where the registration of such interest or right is not otherwise provided for
by the Property Registration Decree, and serves as a notice and warning to
third parties dealing with said property that someone is claiming an interest
on the same or a better right than the registered owner thereof. However, for
the special remedy of adverse claim to be availed of, it must be shown that
there is no other provision in the law for registration of the claimant’s alleged
right in the property
d. Period of validity of adverse claim: 30 days from date of registration
- But adverse claim not ipso facto cancelled after 30 days; hearing necessary.
e. The following are the formal requisites of an adverse claim:
1. The adverse claimant must state the following in writing:
(a) his alleged right or interest;
 TD
 (b) how and under whom such alleged right or interest is acquired;
(c) the description of the land in which the right or interest is claimed; and
(d) the number of the certificate of title;
2. The statement must be signed and sworn to before a notary public or other officer
authorized to administer oath; and
3. The claimant should state his residence or the place to which all notices may be served
upon him.
Non-compliance with the above requisites renders the adverse claim non-registrable and
ineffective.
4. Notice of lis pendens
a. Definition: Lis pendens literally means a pending suit. The doctrine of lis
pendens refers to the jurisdiction, power or control which a court acquires over property
involved in a suit, pending the continuance of the action, and until final judgment
b. Purpose: (1) to protect the rights of the party causing the registration of the lis
pendens, and (2) to advise third persons who purchase or contract on the
subject property that they do so at their peril and subject to the result of the
pending litigation
** The principle of primus tempore, potior jure (first in time, stronger in right) gains greater
significance in case of double sale of immovable property. When the thing sold twice is an
immovable, the one who acquires it and first records it in the Registry of Property, both
made in good faith, shall be deemed the owner. Verily, the act of registration must be
coupled with good faith — that is, the registrant must have no knowledge of the defect or
lack of title of his vendor or must not have been aware of facts which should have put him
upon such inquiry and investigation as might be necessary to acquaint him with the defects
in the title of his vendor
c. Difference between adverse claim and lis pendens:
- while a notice of lis pendens remains during the pendency of the action, although same may
be cancelled under certain circumstances all where the case is prolonged unecessarily or for
failure of the plaintiff to introduce evidence bearing out the allegations of the complaint);
and it has even been held that a court, in the of absence in the absence statute,has the
inherent power to cancel a lis pendens notice in a proper case
- the same is not true in a registered adverse claim, for it may be cancelled only in one
instance, i.e., after the claim is adjudged invalid or unmeritorious by the Court, acting either
as a land registration court or one of general jurisdiction while passing upon a case before it
where the subject of the litigation is the same interest or right which is being secured by the
adverse claim.
5. Registration of judgment
A judgment for the plaintiff in an action for recovery of possession or ownership affecting
registered land shall be entitled to registration upon presentation of a certificate of entry
from the clerk of court to the Register of Deeds who shall enter a memorandum upon the
certificate of title covering the land subject of the action.
If only a portion of the land described in the certificate of title is affected by the judgment,
the certificate of the clerk of court shall contain a description of the portion involved.
Registration is important in order to apprise third persons of the status of the land affected
by the judgment.
When the Register of Deeds is requested to enter a new certificate of title in pursuance of a
judgment, and the owner’s duplicate certificate of title is not presented for cancellation, the
Register of Deeds shall not enter a new certificate but the person claiming to be entitled
thereto may apply by petition to the court which, after hearing, may order the registered
owner or any person withholding the duplicate to surrender the same, and direct the entry
of a new certificate of title upon such surrender.
a. Purpose of registration: The recording of the proper deed or instrument is
designed to prevent frauds and permit the public to act with the presumption
that the recorded deed or instrument exists and is genuine.
6. Different types of judgment that could be registered
a. Partition
SEC. 81. Judgment of partition. — In proceedings for partition of registered land, after the
entry of the final judgment of partition, a copy of such final judgment, certified by the clerk
of the court rendering the same, shall be filed and registered; thereupon, if the land is set-off
to the owners in severalty, each owner shall be entitled to have his certificate entered
showing the share set off to him in severalty, and to receive an owner’s duplicate thereof.
If the land is ordered by the court to be sold, the purchaser or his assigns shall be entitled to
certificate of title entered in his or their favor upon presenting a certified copy of the
judgment confirming the sale.
In case the land is ordered by the court to be assigned to one of the parties upon payment to
the others of the sum ordered by the court, the party to whom the land is thus assigned shall
be entitled to have a certificate of title entered in his favor upon presenting a certified copy
of the judgment: Provided, however, That any new certificate entered in pursuance of
partition proceedings, whether by way of set-off or of assignment or of sale, shall contain a
reference memorandum to the final judgment of partition, and shall be conclusive as to the
title to the same extent and against the same persons as such judgment is made conclusive
by the laws applicable thereto: And provided, further, That any person holding such
certificate of title or a transfer thereof shall have the right to petition the court at any time to
cancel the memorandum relating to such judgment or order and the court, after notice and
hearing, may grant the petition. Such certificate shall thereafter be conclusive in the same
manner and to the same extent as other certificates of title.
 TD
 b. Insolvency:
SEC. 83. Notice of insolvency. — Whenever proceeding in bankruptcy or insolvency, or
analogous proceedings, are instituted against a debtor who owns registered land, it shall be
the duty of the officer serving the notice of the institution of such proceedings on the debtor
to file a copy thereof with the office of the Register of Deeds for the province or city where
the land of the debtor lies. The assignee or trustee appointed by the court in such
proceedings shall be entitled to the entry of a new certificate of the registered land of the
debtor or bankrupt, upon presenting and filing a certified copy of the assignment in
insolvency or order or adjudication in bankruptcy with the insolvent’s or bankrupt’s duplicate
certificate of title; but the new certificate shall state that it is entered to him as assignee in
insolvency or trustee in bankruptcy or other proceedings, as the case may be.
Insolvency proceedings and settlement of a decedent’s estate are both proceedings in rem
which are binding against the whole world. All persons having interest in the subject matter
involved, whether they were notified or not, are equally bound. Consequently, a liquidation
of similar import or “other equivalent general liquidation” must also necessarily be a
proceeding in rem so that all interested persons whether known to the parties or not may be
bound by such proceeding.
c. Eminent Domain
SEC. 85. Land taken by eminent domain. — Whenever any registered land, or interest
therein, is expropriated or taken by eminent domain, the National Government, province,
city, municipality, or any other agency or instrumentality exercising such right shall file for
registration in the proper Registry a certified copy of the judgment which shall state
definitely, by an adequate description, the particular property or interest expropriated, the
number of the certificate of title, and the nature of the public use. A memorandum of the
right or interest taken shall be made on each certificate of title by the Register of Deeds, and
where the fee simple title is taken, a new certificate shall be issued in favor of the National
Government, province, city, municipality, or any other agency or instrumentality exercising
such right for the land so taken. The legal expenses incident to the memorandum of
registration or issuances incident to the memorandum of registration or issuance of a new
certificate shall be for the account of the authority taking the land or interest therein.
d. Settlement of Estate
SEC. 86. Extrajudicial settlement of estate. — When a deed of extrajudicial settlement has
been duly registered, the Register of Deeds shall annotate on the proper title the two-year
lien mentioned in Section 4 of Rule 74 of the Rules of Court. Upon the expiration of the two-
year period and presentation of a verified petition by the registered heirs, devisees or
legatees or any other party in interest that no claim or claims of any creditor, heir or other
person exist, the Register of Deeds shall cancel the two-year lien noted on the title without
the necessity of a court order. The verified petition shall be entered in the Primary Entry
Book and a memorandum thereof made on the title.
No deed of extrajudicial settlement or affidavit of adjudication shall be registered unless the
fact of extrajudicial settlement or adjudication is published once a week for three
consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province and proof thereof is
filed with the Register of Deeds. The proof may consist of the certification of the publisher,
printer, his foreman or principal clerk, or of the editor, business or advertising manager of
the newspaper concerned, or a copy of each week’s issue of the newspaper wherein the
publication appeared.
Cases:
1. San Lorenzo Development Corp v CA: SLDC registered the sale with the Registry of
Deeds after it had acquired knowledge of Babasanta’s claim. Babasanta, however,
argues that the registration of the sale by SLDC was not sufficient to confer upon
the latter any title to the property since the registration was attended by bad faith.
Specifically, he points out that at the time SLDC registered the sale on June 30,
1990, there was already a notice of lis pendens on file with the Register of Deeds.
Did the registration of the sale after the annotation of the notice obliterate the
effects of delivery and possession in good faith which admittedly had occurred
prior to SLDC’s knowledge of the transaction in favor of Babasanta? The Court said
no.
“It must be stressed that as early as 11 February 1989, the Spouses Lu executed the
Option to Buy in favor of SLDC upon receiving P316,160.00 as option money from
SLDC. After SLDC had paid more than one half of the agreed purchase price of
P1,264,640.00, the Spouses Lu subsequently executed on 3 May 1989 a Deed of
Absolute Sale in favor or SLDC. At the time both deeds were executed, SLDC had no
knowledge of the prior transaction of the Spouses Lu with Babasanta. Simply
stated, from the time of execution of the first deed up to the moment of transfer
and delivery of possession of the lands to SLDC, it had acted in good faith and the
subsequent annotation of lis pendens has no effect at all on the consummated sale
between SLDC and the Spouses Lu.
A purchaser in good faith is one who buys property of another without notice that
some other person has a right to, or interest in, such property and pays a full and
fair price for the same at the time of such purchase, or before he has notice of the
claim or interest of some other person in the property. Following the foregoing
definition, we rule that SLDC qualifies as a buyer in good faith since there is no
evidence extant in the records that it had knowledge of the prior transaction in
favor of Babasanta. At the time of the sale of the property to SLDC, the vendors
were still the registered owners of the property and were in fact in possession of
the lands. Time and again, this Court has ruled that a person dealing with the
owner of registered land is not bound to go beyond the certificate of title as he is
 TD
 charged with notice of burdens on the property which are noted on the face of the
register or on the certificate of title. In assailing knowledge of the transaction
between him and the Spouses Lu, Babasanta apparently relies on the principle of
constructive notice incorporated in Section 52 of the Property Registration Decree
(P.D. No. 1529) which reads, thus:
‘Sec. 52. Constructive notice upon registration. — Every conveyance, mortgage,
lease, lien, attachment, order judgment, instrument or entry affecting registered
land shall, if registered, filed, or entered in the office of the Register of Deeds for
the province or city where the land to which it relates lies, be constructive notice to
all persons from the time of such registering, filing, or entering.’ However, the
constructive notice operates as such by the express wording of Section 52 from the
time of the registration of the notice of lis pendens which in this case was effected
only on 2 June 1989, at which time the sale in favor of SLDC had long been
consummated insofar as the obligation of the Spouses Lu to transfer ownership
over the property to SLDC is concerned.
More fundamentally, given the superiority of the right of SLDC to the claim of
Babasanta the annotation of the notice of lis pendens cannot help Babasanta’s
position a bit and it is irrelevant to the good or bad faith characterization of SLDC as
a purchaser. A notice of lis pendens, as the Court held in Nataño v. Esteban, serves
as a warning to a 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. x x x
Assuming ex gratia argumenti that SLDC’s registration of the sale had been tainted
by the prior notice of lis pendens and assuming further for the same nonce that
this is a case of double sale, still Babasanta’s claim could not prevail over that of
SLDC’s. In Abarquez v. Court of Appeals, this Court had the occasion to rule that if a
vendee in a double sale registers the sale after he has acquired knowledge of a
previous sale, the registration constitutes a registration in bad faith and does not
confer upon him any right. If the registration is done in bad faith, it is as if there is
no registration at all, and the buyer who has taken possession first of the property
in good faith shall be preferred.”
2. Ching v. Enrile: In the 1996 case of Sajonas v. Court of Appeals, 258 SCRA 79 (1996),
we explained that a notice of adverse claim remains valid even after the lapse of
the 30-day period provided by Section 70 of PD 1529. Section 70 provides:
Whoever claims any part or interest in registered land adverse to the registered
owner, arising subsequent to the date of the original registration, may, if no other
provision is made in this Decree for registering the same, make a statement in
writing, setting forth fully his alleged right or interest, and how or under whom
acquired, a reference to the number of the certificate of title of the registered
owner, and a description of the land in which the right or interest is claimed.
We held that for as long as there is yet no petition for its cancellation, the notice of
adverse claim remains subsisting.
In a petition for cancellation of adverse claim, a hearing must first be conducted.
The Court has invariably ruled that in case of conflict between a vendee and an
attaching creditor, an attaching creditor who registers the order of attachment and
the sale of the property to him as the highest bidder acquires a valid title to the
property as against a vendee who had previously bought the same property from
the same owner but who failed to register his deed of sale. This is because
registration is the operative act that binds or affects the land insofar as third
persons are concerned. It is upon registration that there is notice to the whole
world. But where a party has knowledge of a prior existing interest, as here, which
is unregistered at the time he acquired a right to the same land, his knowledge of
that prior unregistered interest has the effect of registration as to him. Knowledge
of an unregistered sale is equivalent to registration.
The law does not require a person dealing with the owner of registered land to go
beyond the certificate of title as he may rely on the notices of the encumbrances
on the property annotated on the certificate of title or absence of any annotation.
Here, petitioners’ adverse claim is annotated at the back of the title coupled with
the fact that they are in possession of the disputed property. To us, these
circumstances should have put respondents on guard and required them to
ascertain the property being offered to them has already been sold to another to
prevent injury to prior innocent buyers. A person who deliberately ignores a
significant fact which would create suspicion in an otherwise reasonable man is not
an innocent purchaser for value. It is a well-settled rule that a purchaser cannot
close his eyes to facts which should put a reasonable man upon his guard, and then
claim that he acted in good faith under the belief that there was no defect in the
title of the vendor.
3. Sajonas v. CA: Court held that while the law states that “(t)he adverse claim shall be
effective for a period of thirty days from the date of registration,” this provision
should not be treated separately, but should be read in relation to the sentence
following that “(a)fter the lapse of said period, the annotation of adverse claim may
be cancelled upon filing of a verified petition therefor by the party in interest.” If
the rationale of the law is for the adverse claim to ipso facto lose force and effect
after the lapse of thirty days, then no adverse claim need be cancelled. The law,
taken together, simply means that the cancellation of the adverse claim is still
 TD
 necessary to render it ineffective, otherwise, the inscription will remain annotated
and shall continue as a lien upon the property. A fortiori, the limitation on the
period of effectivity is immaterial in determining the validity or invalidity of an
adverse claim which is the principal issue to be decided by the court.
The Register of Deeds cannot unilaterally cancel the adverse claim. There must be a court
hearing for the purpose. The reason for this is to afford the adverse claimant an opportunity
to be heard, providing a venue where the propriety of his claimed interest can be established
or revoked, all for the purpose of determining at least the existence of any encumbrance on
the title arising from such adverse claim. This is in line with the provision “that after
cancellation, no second adverse claim shall be registered by the same claimant.”
IX. RECONSTITUTION OF TITLE; RECORDING OF DEALINGS RELATING TO UNREGISTERED
LANDS
1. Judicial Reconstitution of Certificate of Title
a. Purpose
 The purpose of the reconstitution of any document, book or record is to
have the same reproduced, after observing the procedure prescribed by law,
in the same form they were when the loss or destruction occurred
 Reconstitution denotes restoration of the lost title in its original form and
condition
b. RA No. 26 entitled “An Act Providing a Special Procedure for the
Reconstitution of Torrens Certificates of Titles Lost or Destroyed” approved on
September 25, 1946 confers jurisdiction or authority upon the Regional Trial
Court to hear and decide petitions for judicial reconstitution.
 action in rem
 A judicially reconstituted title has the same validity and legal effect as the
original thereof
 Unlike an extrajudicially reconstituted title where there is statutory
reservation that the new title “shall be without prejudice to any party whose
right or interest in the property was duly noted in the original, at the time it
was lost or destroyed”
c. Where to file the petition - Under Section 12, RA No. 26, the petition for
reconstitution which shall be filed by the registered owner, his assigns, or any
person having an interest in the property with the proper Regional Trial Court
where the same is based on sources enumerated in Sections 2(c), 2(d), 2(e),
2(f), 3(c), 3(d), 3(e) and/or 3(f) of the Act.
The petition shall state or contain, among other things, the following:
(a) that the owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title had been lost or destroyed;
(b) that no co-owner’s mortgagee’s or lessee’s duplicate had been issued, or, if any had been
issued, the same had been lost or destroyed;
(c) the location, area and boundaries of the property;
(d) the nature and description of the buildings or improvements, if any, which do not belong
to the owner of the land, and the names and addresses of the owners of such buildings or
improvements;
(e) the names and addresses of the occupants or persons in possession of the property, of
the owners of the adjoining properties and all persons who may have any interest in the
property;
(f) a detailed description of the encumbrances, if any, affecting the property; and
(g) a statement that no deeds or other instruments affecting the property have been
presented for registration, or, if there be any, the registration thereof has not been
accomplished, as yet.
All the documents, or authenticated copies thereof, to be introduced in evidence in support
of the petition for reconstitution shall be attached thereto and filed with the same: Provided,
That in case the reconstitution is to be made exclusively from sources enumerated in Section
2(f) or 3(f), the petition shall be further be accompanied with a plan and technical description
of the property duly approved by the Administrator, Land Registration Authority, or with a
certified copy of the description taken from a prior certificate of title covering the same
property.
2. Sources of reconstitution of title
a. Exclusive enumeration
(1) For original certificates of title
(a) The owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title;
(b) The co-owner’s, mortgagee’s, or lessee’s duplicate of the certificate of title;
(c) A certified copy of the certificate of title, previously issued by the register of deeds or by a
legal custodian thereof;
(d) An authenticated copy of the decree of registration or patent, as the case may be,
pursuant to which the original certificate of title was issued;
(e) A document, on file in the registry of deeds, by which the property, the description of
which is given in said document, is mortgaged, leased or encumbered, or an authenticated
copy of said document showing that its original had been registered; and
(f) Any other document which, in the judgment of the court, is sufficient and proper basis for
reconstituting the lost or destroyed certificate of title.
(2) For transfer certificates of title
(a) The owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title;
(b) The co-owner’s, mortgagee’s, or lessee’s duplicate of the certificate of title;
(c) A certified copy of the certificate of title, previously issued by the register of deeds or by a
legal custodian thereof;
(d) The deed of transfer or other document, on file in the registry of deeds, containing the
description of the property, or an authenticated copy thereof, showing that its original had
been registered, and pursuant to which the lost or destroyed transfer certificate of title was
 TD
issued; (e) A document, on file in the registry of deeds, by which the property, the
description of which is given in said document, is mortgaged, leased or encumbered, or an
authenticated copy of said document showing that its original had been registered; and
(f) Any other document which, in the judgment of the court, is sufficient and proper basis for
reconstituting the lost or destroyed certificate of title.
As to (d) of both sections — While Section 2(d) requires an authenticated copy of the decree
of registration or patent, Section 3(d) requires the deed of transfer or other document in the
registry of deeds, containing the description of the property, or an authenticated copy
thereof, showing that its original had been registered, and pursuant to which the lost or
destroyed certificate of title was issued.
Note, however, that both Sections 2(f) and 3(f) are the same: “Any other document which, in
the judgment of the court, is sufficient and proper basis for reconstituting the lost or
destroyed certificate of title.”
 With respect to liens and encumbrances affecting lost or destroyed certificates of title,
Section 4 provide the ff sources:
(a) Annotations or memoranda appearing on the owner’s co-owner’s mortgagee’s or lessee’s
duplicate;
(b) Registered documents on file in the registry of deeds, or authenticated copies thereof
showing that the originals thereof had been registered; and
(c) Any other document which, in the judgment of the court, is sufficient and proper basis for
reconstituting the liens or encumbrances affecting the property covered by the lost or
destroyed certificate of title.
* the phrase “any other document” must refer to similar documents previously enumerated
therein
Who files? only by “the registered owner, his assigns, or any person who has an interest in
the property
b. Presentation of other proofs of existence of title
Paragraph 5 of LRC Circular No. 35, dated June 13, 1983, reads in part:
“5. In case the reconstitution is to be made exclusively from sources enumerated in Sections
2(f) and 3(f) of Republic Act No. 26 in relation to section 12 thereof, the signed duplicate
copy of the petition to be forwarded to this Commission shall be accompanied by the
following:
(a) A duly prepared plan of said parcel of land in tracing cloth,
- with two (2) print copies thereof, prepared by the government agency which issued the
certified technical description, or by a duly licensed Geodetic Engineer who shall certify
thereon that he prepared the same on the basis of a duly certified technical description.
Where the plan as submitted is certified by the government agency which issued the same, it
is sufficient that the technical description be prepared by a duly licensed Geodetic Engineer
on the basis of said certified plan.
(b) The original, two (2) duplicate copies, and a xerox copy of the original of the technical
description of the parcel of land covered by the certificate of title, duly certified by the
authorized officer of the Bureau of Lands or the Land Registration Commission who issued
the technical description.
(c) A signed copy of the certification of the Register of Deeds concerned that the original of
the certificate of title on file in the Registry was either lost or destroyed, indicating the name
of the registered owner, if known from the other records on file in said office.”
Dizon v. Discaya: that subparagraphs (a), (b), and (c) of paragraph 5 of LRC Circular No. 35 are
merely additional documents that must accompany the petition to be forwarded to the Land
Registration Authority. When Section 2(f) of RA No. 26 speaks of “any other document,” the
same must refer to similar documents previously enumerated therein, that is, those
mentioned in Sections 2(a), (b), (c), and (d).
Case: the text of the decision, quoted verbatim, simply stated: “Lote No. 1499. — A favor de
Tirso Tumulak, casado con Engrasia Pongasi.” Moreover, the geodetic engineer who certified
that the copy of the decision attached to the petition was a true copy of the same is not the
public officer who is in custody thereof as required by Section 7, Rule 130 of the Revised
Rules on Evidence, hence, the certification has no probative value.
3. Jurisdictional requirements for judicial reconstitution: (a) publication, (b) posting, and
(c) service of notice are mandatory.
a. Effect of non-compliance: nullify the decree of reconstitution
 Judicial reconstitution of title partakes of a land registration proceeding, hence, notice
of the proceedings must be done in the manner set forth by the law. Failure to comply
therewith is fatal to the court’s jurisdiction.
 SEC. 13.
-notice published, at the expense of the petitioner, twice in successive issues of the Official
Gazette
-posted on the main entrance of the provincial building and of the municipal building of the
municipality or city in which the land is situated
-at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing.
-copy of the notice to be sent, by registered mail or otherwise, at the expense of the
petitioner, to every person named therein whose address is known, at least 30 days prior to
the date of hearing.
-Said notice shall state: the number of the lost or destroyed certificate of title, if known, the
name of the registered owner, the names of the occupants or persons in possession of the
property, the owners of the adjoining properties and all other interested parties, the
 TD
 location, area and boundaries of the property, and the date on which all persons having any
interest therein must appear and file their claim or objections to the petition.
- at the hearing, petitioner shall submit proof of the publication, posting and service of the
notice as directed by the court
b. Service of Notice to adjacent owners: giving of notices to adjoining owners
and the actual occupants of the land is mandatory and jurisdictional in judicial
reconstitution of certificates
Tahanan Development Corporation v. Court of Appeals:
- The failure or omission to notify the person as owner, possessor or occupant of property
adjacent to the land subject of reconstitution or as claimant or person having an interest,
title or claim to said land, as well as the failure or omission to post copies of the notice of
hearing on the main entrance of the municipality on which the land is situated, at the
provincial building and at the municipal building thereat, are fatal to the acquisition and
exercise of jurisdiction by the trial court.
- further stressed that the petitioners are duty-bound to know who are their actual adjacent
boundary owners on all sides and directions of their property
- charged with the obligation to inquire who their neighbors are in actual possession and
occupancy not only of portions of their own property but also of land adjacent thereto.
- This duty or obligation cannot be ignored or simply brushed aside where the location or the
properties involved is a prime site for land development, expansion, suitable for residential,
commercial and industrial purposes and where every square inch of real estate becomes a
valuable and profitable investment.
- not sufficient that the notice of hearing directed that copies thereof be posted only in the
bulletin board of the court since the law specifically requires that the notice of the petition
shall be posted on the main entrance of the municipality or city on which the land is
situated, at the provincial building and at the municipal building at least thirty days prior to
the date of hearing.
4. Effect of a void reconstitution of title: the court rendering the decision has not acquired
jurisdiction over the petition for issuance of a new title
a. Writ of possession in a reconstitution case: not proper in a reconstitution
proceeding.
 In a land registration case, a writ of possession may be issued only pursuant
to a decree of registration in an original land registration proceedings “not
only against the person who has been defeated in a registration case but
also against anyone adversely occupying the land or any portion thereof
during the proceedings up to the issuance of the decree.”
 It cannot, however, be issued in a petition for reconstitution of an allegedly
lost or destroyed certificate of title.
 Reconstitution does not confirm or adjudicate ownership over the property
covered by the reconstituted title as in original land registration proceedings
where, in the latter, a writ of possession may be issued to place the
applicant-owner in possession.
 A person who seeks a reconstitution of a certificate of title over a property
he does not actually possess cannot, by a mere motion for the issuance of a
writ of possession, which is summary in nature, deprive the actual occupants
of possession thereof.
 Possession and/or ownership of the property should be threshed out in a
separate proceeding.
5. Administrative Reconstitution of Certificate of Title
- governed by RA No. 6732, approved on July 17, 1989
a. Grounds: in case of substantial loss or destruction of land titles due to fire,
flood or other force majeure as determined by the LRA
b. Section 110 of PD No. 1529 as amended; RA No. 6732
SEC. 110. Reconstitution of Lost or Destroyed Original of Torrens Title. — Original copies of
certificates of titles lost or destroyed in the offices of Register of Deeds as well as liens and
encumbrances affecting the lands covered by such titles shall be reconstituted judicially in
accordance with the procedure prescribed in Republic Act No. 26 insofar as not inconsistent
with this Decree. The procedure relative to administrative reconstitution of lost or destroyed
certificate prescribed in said Act may be availed of only: in case of substantial loss or
destruction of land titles due to fire, flood or other force majeure as determined by the
Administrator of the Land Registration Authority: Provided, That the number of certificates of
titles lost or damaged should be at least ten percent (10%) of the total number in the
possession of the Office of the Register of Deeds: Provided, further, That in no case shall the
number of certificates of titles lost or damaged be less than five hundred (500).
Notice of all hearings of the petition for judicial reconstitution shall be furnished the Register
of Deeds of the place where the land is situated and to the Administrator of the Land
Registration Authority. No order or judgment ordering the reconstitution of a certificate of
title shall become final until the lapse of fifteen (15) days from receipt by the Register of
Deeds and by the Administrator of the Land Registration Authority of a notice of such order
or judgment without any appeal having been filed by any such officials.
6. Replacement of lost, destroyed, or stolen Owner’s Duplicate Certificate of Title
a. Section 109 of RA No. 1529: law applicable in petitions for issuance of new
owner’s duplicate certificates of title which are lost or stolen or destroyed.
On the other hand, RA No. 26 applies only in cases of reconstitution of lost or destroyed
original certificates on file with the Register of Deeds
b. Venue: Regional Trial Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over all applications
for original registration of title to lands including improvements and interests
 TD
 therein, and over all petitions filed after original registration of title, with
power to hear and determine all questions arising upon such applications or
petitions. Corollarily, under Section 108, all petitions or motions after original
registration shall be filed and entitled in the original case in which the decree
of registration was entered. Consequently, a petition for replacement of a lost
duplicate certificate of title shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court of the
place where the land lies, and this is true even if the title was issued pursuant
to a public land patent registered in accordance with Section 103 of the
Decree
c. Procedure to replace lost, destroyed or stolen Owner’s Duplicate Certificate of
Title
(a) The registered owner or other person in interest shall send notice of the loss or
destruction of the owner’s duplicate certificate of title to the Register of Deeds of the
province or city where the land lies as soon as the loss or destruction is discovered; (mere
affidavit of loss attached to the petition in the lower court is insufficient)
(b) The corresponding petition for the replacement of the loss or destroyed owner’s
duplicate certificate shall then be filed in court and entitled in the original case in which the
decree of registration was entered;
(c) The petition shall state under oath the facts and circumstances surrounding such loss or
destruction;
(d) The court may set the petition for hearing, after due notice to the Register of Deeds and
all other interested parties as shown in the memorandum of encumbrances noted in the
original or transfer certificate of title on file in the office of the Register of Deeds;
(e) After due notice and hearing, the court may direct the issuance of a new duplicate
certificate which shall contain a memorandum of the fact that it is issued in place of the lost
or destroyed certificate and shall in all respects be entitled to the same faith and credit as the
original duplicate.
7. Recording of instruments related to unregistered lands
a. Section 113 of PD 1529
b. Purpose:
- system of registration under the Spanish Mortgage Law, by express provision of Section 2 of
the Property Registration Decree, has been discontinued and all lands registered under said
system which are not yet covered by Torrens titles shall be considered unregistered lands.
- However, all instruments affecting lands originally registered under the Spanish Mortgage
Law may be recorded under Section 113 of the decree until the land shall have been brought
under the operation of the Torrens system.
c. Recording without prejudice to a third party with better right: Paragraph (b) of
Section 113 states that any recording made under said section shall be without
prejudice to a third party with a “better right.” Thus, it has been held that the
inscription of a mortgage of unregistered land did not materially improve the
petitioners’ situation, for such inscription is without prejudice to third parties with
a better right.5
- A mortgage of unregistered property which is recorded under Act No. 3344 is valid as
against everybody except a third person having a better right
- Relevantly, Article 1608 of the Civil Code provides that “(t)he vendor may bring his action
against every possessor whose right is derived from the vendee even if in the second
contract no mention should have been made of the right to repurchase, without prejudice
to the provisions of the Mortgage Law and the Land Registration Law with respect to third
persons.”
d. Ministerial recording:
- The Register of Deeds does not exercise a judicial or quasi-judicial power in the registration
of sheriff’s deeds or certificates of sale.
- His duty with respect to the notation or recording of these instruments, so far at least as
relates to unregistered property, is ministerial only;
- and the registration of such instruments adds nothing to their intrinsic effect
- Registration in such cases is required merely as a means of notification of the purchasers’
rights to the public.
- If the Register of Deeds refuses to register the instrument, he shall advise the party in
interest in writing of the grounds for his refusal, and the latter may elevate the matter to
the Administrator, Land Registration Authority, en consulta pursuant to Section 117 of the
Property Registration Decree.
HOW?
- Register of Deeds shall keep a primary entry book and a registration book
- primary entry book shall contain, among other particulars, the entry number, names of the
parties, nature of the document, and the date, hour and minute it was presented.
- recording shall be effected by an annotation on the registration book after the same shall
have been entered in the primary entry book.
- After recording, the Register of Deeds shall endorse on the original of the instrument the file
number and the date as well as the hour and minute when the instrument was received,
returning to the registrant the duplicate of the instrument with a certification that he has
recorded the same.
Applicability of the Civil Code:
- A person who has acquired ownership of unregistered land by prescription under the Civil
Code may be considered as having acquired a right unaffected by a subsequent transaction
over the same land even if recorded under said section.
- under paragraph (d), a tax sale, attachment and levy, notice of lis pendens, adverse claim
and other instruments in the nature of involuntary dealing with respect to unregistered
lands, if made in the form sufficient in law, shall be admissible to record.
Cases:
 TD
 1. Dy v Aldea: When the owner’s duplicate certificate of title has not been lost, the question to be resolved therefore is: who between petitioners and respondent has a better
reconstituted certificate is void. The fact of loss or destruction of the OCT is crucial right to the disputed lot?
in clothing the RTC with jurisdiction over the judicial reconstitution proceedings.
2. Republic v IAC GR68303: It is not disputed, to begin with, that the notices (of X. PATENTS AND FRAUDULENT TITLES
hearing) were not posted on the main entrances of the provincial and municipal 1. Patents
halls of the locality in which the lands are located. We have held that such a mode a. Nature and Purpose
of publication is a jurisdictional requirement. The failure on the part of the - instruments mentioned in Section 103 whereby public lands are “alienated, granted, or
applicant to comply with it confers no jurisdiction upon the court. Neither is there conveyed” are instruments transferring ownership — not documents of lease, transferring
any showing that the adjacent owners or other interested parties were actually mere possession
notified of the pending application. This too taints the petition with a jurisdictional - provision directs the issuance to the grantee of “an owner’s duplicate certificate”
defect. It is not enough that there is publication in the Official Gazette. Publication - After due registration and issuance of the certificate of title, the land shall be deemed
of the notice in the Official Gazette is but one requirement. In addition, Republic registered land to all intents and purposes under the Property Registration Decree.
Act No. 26 decrees that such a notice be posted “on the main entrance” of the - Public land patents when duly registered are veritable Torrens titles subject to no
corresponding provincial Capitol and municipal building, as well as served actually encumbrances except those stated therein, plus those specified by the statute.
upon the owners of adjacent lands. Failure to comply with such requisites will - They become private property which can no longer be the subject of subsequent disposition
nullify the decree of reconstitution. It shall be noted that a judicial reconstitution of by the Director of Lands.
title partakes of a land registration proceeding. Thus, notice of the proceedings b. Types of patent
must be done in the manner set forth by the letter of the law. c. Patent treated as a certificate of title
- Certificate of service prepared by sheriff, with an order addressed to the station commander 2. Homestead Patent
of sulu to post the proper notices and a certificate of publication in the OG is not enough - Chapter IV (Homesteads) of the Public Land Act governs the disposition of alienable public
proof – no presumption of performance of duty lands through homestead.
- Lack of opposition on the application by the Solicitor General not sufficient; Court must a. Requisites
convince itself that evidence is substantial enough to warrant reconstitution. - any citizen of the Philippines over the age of eighteen years
- Act No. 3430 (enacted 1928, properties could have undergone successive transfers) and - or the head of a family, may enter a homestead of not exceeding twelve hectares of
Proclamation No. 1530 (does not specifically name sultan kiram as owner of the lands agricultural land of the public domain
reserved for resettlement) not enough to support the petition at bar. - applicant must have cultivated and improved at least one-fifth of the land continuously
3. Sabitsana v Muertegui since the approval of the application
- On the question of jurisdiction, it is clear under the Rules that an action for quieting of title - resided for at least one year in the municipality in which the land is located, or in a
may be instituted in the RTCs, regardless of the assessed value of the real property in municipality adjacent to the same
dispute. Under Rule 63 of the Rules of Court, an action to quiet title to real property or - upon payment of the required fee, he shall be entitled to a patent.
remove clouds therefrom may be brought in the appropriate RTC. b. Limitations of land – max 12 hectares of agricultural land of public domain
- Both the trial court and the CA are, however, wrong in applying Article 1544 of the Civil c. Limitation of transfer
Code. Both courts seem to have forgotten that the provision does not apply to sales d. Where to file – trial court
involving unregistered land. Suffice it to state that the issue of the buyer’s good or bad faith 3. Sales Patent
is relevant only where the subject of the sale is registered land, and the purchaser is buying a. Types of Sales patent
the same from the registered owner whose title to the land is clean. In such case, the (1) Public agricultural lands
purchaser who relies on the clean title of the registered owner is protected if he is a (2) Lands for residential, commercial or industrial purposes
purchaser in good faith for value. Act No. 3344 applies to sale of unregistered lands. What (3) Lands for residential purposes (direct sale)
applies in this case is Act No. 3344, as amended, which provides for the system of recording (4) Lands within military reservations
of transactions over unregistered real estate. Act No. 3344 expressly declares that any (5) Lands for educational, charitable and other similar purposes
registration made shall be without prejudice to a third party with a better right. The b. Limitations of land

 TD
 c. Limitations of transfer  FOR VALUE – full and fair price at the time of the purchase or before receiving any
d. Where to file notice of any other person’s claim
4. Free Patent under CA No. 141
- Section 44, Chapter VII (Free Patents) of the Public Land Act provides: However in the case of *** : the court ruled that anything that must put reasonable prudent
- any natural-born citizen of the Philippines who is not the owner of more than twelve (12) person on guard, so if there are facts and circumstances in re fraud, person must inquire on
hectares those unless not purchaser in good faith
- for at least thirty (30) years prior to the effectivity of this amendatory Act, has continuously If IPFV – mirror doctrine – can rely without further inquiry unless there are facts and
occupied and cultivated, either by himself or through his predecessors-in-interest a tract or circusmtances that would put him on guard
tracts of agricultural public lands subject to disposition
- who shall have paid the real estate tax thereon while the same has not been occupied by Carpio: right to rely on torrens no inquiry needed except actual knowledge blabla
any person If not IPFV – cant invoke mirror doctrine
- shall be entitled, under the provisions of this Chapter, to have a free patent issued to him
for such tract or tracts of such land not to exceed twelve (12) hectares Fraudulent titles
- Limitations of land - not to exceed twelve (12) hectares General rule: instrument should not be forged, if it is, even if accompanied by owners duplicate
LECTURE NOTES: certificate of title, the registered owner does not thereby lose his title, and neither does the
FREE PATENT CA 141 assignee in the forged deed acquire any right or title to the prop
 Citizen
 Max 12h (Joaquin v Madrid)
 30 years possession and ownership Why protect? The law protects a greater degree a purchaser who buys from the registered owner
 A&d land of pub domain himself.
 Yet to determine by jurisprudence if amended na ung june 12 1945 in re Foreged deed may be root of a valid tittle.
this
 FREE PATENT RA 10023 – easiest way to obtain patent (blondeau v nano)
Highly urban cities: 200 sqm
Othe 500 sqm (tenio obsequio v ca 107967 march 1 1994) – parcel of land with the respondent, had an overseer
First and second 750 sqm of his farm land, that overseer forged a dos transferring to himself. The respondent was also
Other mun 1000 sqm negligent by leaving the ODCT with overseer. The overseer presented the forged and the ODCT.
All residential lands under ca 141 or those residential lands in delisted military reservations can So issued talaga. To overseer. Petitioner bought the title from overseer. The tct was issued to
be patented tenio.
BUT: possessed and occupied the lands under a bona fide claim of ownership for at least 10 years SHOULD THE CERT OF TITLE IN FAVOR OF PETITIONER BE UPHELD. YES BECAUSE A FORGED DEED
Restrictions under ca 141 not applicable OF SALE MAY BE A ROOT OF VALID TITLE IF IT HAS PASSED THRU AN INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR
 Patent granted, must be registered in the ROD, the ROD will issue a certificate of VALUE) but generally no.
title, after 1 year indefeasible
- lease Is it required the og owner to have exercised negligence? Because of unfair if diligence pero this
- confirmation of imperfect title will still apply? The court is not clear. Before this case, negligence was needed, but after. The
IPFV does not need to inquire further. So now there is no need that og owner be negligent.
FRAUDULENT TRANSACTIONS
 Innocent purchaser for value: Requirements: ****** FINALS
 2 qualifications: Valid cert of tittle
 GOOD FAITH –without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in it Forged deed transferring title to land to forger
Forger executes dos in favor of ipv

 TD
Ipv no knowledge of forgery
Effect of 2 titles over the same land
Sps yu v ayala land – large track of land in las pinas, petitioner surveyed the land in 1921, valid
and regular. The predecessors of ayala surveyed the land with many irregularities. Because there
already was a survery. 1960 the predecessor was able to register. 1967, the petitioners were able
to register from valid survey. Ayala claiming that they should have kasi earlier registered. And
title earlier issued.
GR: the title with the earlier date prevails.
EXCEPTION: if it can be clearly ascertained by the ordinary rules of construction relating to
written documents, that the inclusion of the land in the certificate of prior date is a mistake, the
mistake may be rectified by holding the latter of the two certs of title to be conclusive.
So the later title of sps yu was issued because GLARING MISTAKE. ONLY IN EXCEPTIONAL CASES.
SPS MATHAY – pets were able to register title 1980
Respondents – 1987
Gr: look at the date of title
Exc: other than the date, look at previous certs of title, and saw single mother title. They saw that
the title of sps. Mathay in 1980 was a product of a forged DOS – fraudulent title. So even if the
title of sps mathay was earlier, it will not defeat the valid 1987 title.
** FIRST LOOK AT THE DATES
IF MAY OTHER FACS, INVESTIGATE
How to consider IPV? Sps mathay placed fences around the lot even if respondents are still
inside. So not ipv. Knowing may inside the land.
Cases:
1. Agne v Director of Lands: it was held that the long and continued possession of
petitioners under a valid claim of title cannot be defeated by the claim of a
registered owner whose title is defective from the beginning. Moreover, the failure
of private respondents to assert their claim over the disputed property for almost
thirty years constitutes laches and bars an action to recover the same. The
registered owners’ right to recover possession of the property and title thereto
from petitioners has, by long inaction or inexcusable neglect, been converted into a
stale demand.
2. Spouses Mathay v CA: Here, petitioners cannot be categorized as purchasers in
good faith. Prior to the fencing of subject land, neither they (Mathays) nor their
predecessors-in-interest (Banayo and Pugay) ever possessed the same. In fact, at
the time the said property was sold to petitioners, the private respondents were
not only in actual possession of the same but also built their houses thereon,
cultivated it and were in full enjoyment of the produce and fruits gathered
therefrom. Although it is a recognized principle that a person dealing on a
registered land need not go beyond its certificate of title, it is also a firmly settled
rule that where there are circumstances which would put a party on guard and
prompt him to investigate or inspect the property being sold to him, such as the
presence of occupants/tenants thereon, it is, of course, expected from the
purchaser of a valued piece of land to inquire first into the status or nature of
possession of the occupants, i.e., whether or not the occupants possess the land en
concepto de dueño, in concept of owner. As is the common practice in the real
estate industry, an ocular inspection of the premises involved is a safeguard a
cautious and prudent purchaser usually takes. Should he find out that the land he
intends to buy is occupied by anybody else other than the seller who, as in this
case, is not in actual possession, it would then be incumbent upon the purchaser to
verify the extent of the occupant’s possessory rights. The failure of a prospective
buyer to take such precautionary steps would mean negligence on his part and
would thereby preclude him from claiming or invoking the rights of a ‘purchaser in
good faith.’
Thus, where private respondents communicated their objection to the fencing of
the area by petitioner as purchaser but they were ignored by petitioner who
continued enclosing the premises under controversy in the presence of armed men
employed by him, the purchaser cannot claim that he is a purchaser in good faith
Also, where the purchaser herself visited the property but she carefully evaded
seeing personally the actual occupant thereof who could have easily enlightened
her as to the true owner, such unnatural behavior points more convincingly to the
fact that she was aware that her vendor was not its real owner.
** But the rule that where two certificates purport to include the same land, the earlier in
date prevails, is valid only absent any anomaly or irregularity tainting the process of
registration.
*He who asserts the status of a purchaser in good faith and for value, has the burden of
proving such assertion.
*As is the common practice in the real estate industry, an ocular inspection of the premises
involved is a safeguard a cautious and prudent purchaser usually takes, and should he find
out that the land he intends to buy is occupied by anybody else other than the seller who is
not in actual possession, it would then be incumbent upon the purchaser to verify the extent
of the occupant’s possessory rights.
*No one can transfer a greater right to another than he himself has—the spring cannot rise
higher than its source.
 TD
*A certificate is not conclusive evidence of title if it is shown that the same land had already
been registered and an earlier certificate for the same is in existence.
*On the assumption that there was regularity in the registration leading to the eventual
issuance of two transfer certificates of title, the better approach is to trace the original
certificates from which the certificates of title in dispute were derived, and should there be
only one common original certificate of title, the transfer certificate issued on an earlier date
along the line must prevail, absent any anomaly or irregularity tainting the process of
registration.
Court determine whether to apply the general rule or the exception in the superiority of
titles with an earlier registration date.
The survey of the registered land may be scrutinized by the courts when compelling reasons
exist
Psu-47035, Psu-80886 and Psu-80886/SW0-20609 contain numerous and serious
irregularities which cast doubt on the validity of OCT Nos. 242, 244 and 1609

3. Bangis v Heirs of Adolfo: As held in the case of Top Management Programs

Corporation v. Luis Fajardo and the Register of Deeds of Las Piñas City, 652 SCRA 18
(2011): “if two certificates of title purport to include the same land, whether wholly
or partly, the better approach is to trace the original certificates from which the
certificates of titles were derived.” Having, thus, traced the roots of the parties’
respective titles supported by the records of the Register of Deeds of Malaybalay
City, the courts a quo were correct in upholding the title of the Heirs of Adolfo as
against TCT No. T-10567 of Bangis, notwithstanding its earlier issuance on August
18, 1976 or long before the Heirs of Adolfo secured their own titles on May 26,
1998. To paraphrase the Court’s ruling in Mathay v. Court of Appeals, 295 SCRA 556
(1998): where two (2) transfer certificates of title have been issued on different
dates, the one who holds the earlier title may prevail only in the absence of any
anomaly or irregularity in the process of its registration, which circumstance does
not obtain in this case.

*No title in derogation of that of the registered owner can be acquired by prescription or
adverse possession.

4. Spouses Yu Hwa Ping v. Ayala Land Inc.:

The general rule is that in the case of two certificates of title, purporting to include the same
land, the earlier in date prevails, whether the land comprised in the latter certificate be
wholly, or only in part, comprised in the earlier certificate.
Exception: if it was procured through fraud or was otherwise jurisdictionally flawed. Thus, if
there is a compelling and genuine reason to set aside the rule on the superiority of earlier
registered title, the Court may look into the validity of the title bearing the latter date of
registration, taking into consideration the evidence presented by the parties.
*In this case, the petitioners assail the numerous and serious defects in the surveys of OCT
Nos. 242, 244 and 1609, which cast doubt on the inclusion of the subject lands in ALI's titles.
Accordingly, the Court must delve into the merits of their contentions to determine whether
the subject properties are truly and genuinely included in ALI's title. Merely relying on the
date of registration of the original titles is insufficient because it is the surveys therein that
are being assailed. It is only through a judicious scrutiny of the evidence presented may the

 TD