Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Land Titles and Deeds

    Uploaded by

    Kring de Vera
    363 views16 pages
    reviewer

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    reviewer

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    363 views16 pages

    Land Titles and Deeds

    Uploaded by

    Kring de Vera
    reviewer

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 16
    LAND TITLES AND DEEDS 1985 Action for Annulment of Registration Q. (@) Within one year from tho issuance of the decree of registration and certificate of title in A’s name, B brought an action for their annulment in the Regional Trial Court on the ground that obtained them thru fraud. In his answer to the complaint, A, alleged that the court had no jurisdiction over the case and averred, by way of counterclaim, that he has just discovered that B succeeded three years ago in registering in his name, by false and fraudulent representations, another parcel of land owmed and possessed by 4. He, therefore, prayed that Bs action be dismissed and that he be ordered to transfer his title to him (A). ‘The trial court dismissed beth the complaint and counterclaim Comment on the legality of the order of dismissal. (b) After finding on a bus an envelope containing two Torrens Certificates of title in A’s name, & posing as A and forging his signature, sold the two parcels of and described in the titles to X who bought them in good faith and for value and to whom transfer certificates were issued in his name, He then conveyed one parcel to Y, a bonafide purchaser for value, while the other was levied upon to satisfy judgment against x ‘Who has a better right to the aforementioned parcels of land, & Y, or the judgment creditor? Discuss. (c) The register of deeds refused to record a deed of sale executed in favor of a Filipino woman on the ground that she is an alien b because her husband is an alien and although she secured an absolute divorce from him abroad, the divorce is void under our law, which governs her status, does not recognize absolute divorce. Rule on the legality of the register of deed’s refiusal to register. A. (a) Under Section 32, P-D. 1529, a person who owns a piece of land or any interest therein that was fraudulently registered in another's name is given the right to file a petition (o review or reopen the decree of registration not later than one year from the date of entry thereof: This remedy will not lio however, if title to the land has boon transferred to an innocent purchaser for value. The case at hand is denominated as an action for annulment of both the decree and title, based on fraud, If we treat this case ae an ordinary civil action that was filed with the RTC in the lattet’s capacity as_a court of general jnrisdiction, I believe that the court acted correctly in dismissing it, becaiige the proper remedy of the aggrieved party would be a petition for review of the decree which must be filed with the RTC, in its capacity-as_adaid resistraliait court. The reason for this is that the case, in essence, petition for review, a mere continuation of the original proceedings, over which the RTC sitting as a land registration court has exclusive jurisdiction, So, the RTC acted correctly in dismissing the action for lack of jurisdiction. in the other hand, if the case was filed with the RTC in its capacily as a land. ourt, I believe the dismissal se in errofy because in that cEpacity it has in ive jurisdiction to hear and decid& what in essence, is, apelition for review of aan ayiind Fesistration court, the RTC acted comectly in dismissing. the counterclaim of B because in that capacity it enjoys only special and linnited jurisdiction and, therefor, it ean not take cosnizance thereof. The counterclaim for reconveyance of another parcel of Iand is an aetion in persona which falls. properly, wathin Ure competence of ordinary civil courts (b) I Boliove A retains ownership of both parcels of land. A forged deed of sale ie an absolute nullity. and, therefore, conveys no title. A deed of sale executed by an iwanaster had cia Weat~fore aud effect. Registration of the deed and consequent (eglsration and issuanes of a transfor cettficae of title, even to an innocent purchaser, will not cure the infirmity. itis also an established rule that a forged deed can be the root of a good title, This can happen where the ttle has bean registered in the name of the forger and he Jater transfers or mortgages the same to an innocent third party for value. In this case, the third party who relied on sshat appoars in the cartficate of ttle should be protected. (Duran v Gaspar V. IAC, Tiangco, GR No. L-64159, Sept, 10, 1985), However, in the instant case, (@title way ever tranfemed or registered ia the name of the forger. The rule discussed above does not apply. Therefore, A never lost hie Tight and can recover the land trom ¥ and the judgment creditor. (c)I believe the Register of Deeds erred in refusing to register the same for the ‘reason stated in the question. ‘When all the formal sequisites for registration are pressnted. it is the duty of the RD to effect_the registration. And this duty is clearly ctitmisterial | shd-nrandatory th character. The main purpose of registration is merely to give nofice to the pUblic, either aetHilly oF consiryctively. ln one case, the Supreme court ruled that suspected invalidity of the contr; und to refuse registration. In the instant case, unlike in Krivenko where vendes was admittedly an alien, the vendee is a Filipino, ‘The only reason the RD refused to register is because she was ‘married to an alion. Aside from the fact that they have divorced, it is not oven certain of clear that she lost hor Filipino citizenship by reason alone of her marriage. This depends upon the laws of her husbaud’s country. The question whether she lost Filipino citizenship, under these facts, should be decided after registration bond Region (mmidiony en comida 1988 Prescription of Actions Q (a) 1) Is ttle to registered lund subject to preseription? Explain your answer 2) How about the right of the registered owner to recover possession, is it equally imprescriptible? Why? 3) What effect has the equitable principle of laches on the imprescriptibility of Torrens Title? Explain. (b) In passing upon the registrability of a document sought to be registered, what formal requisites is the Register of Deeds charged to determine, under his responsibility, whether or not they have been complied with? A. (a) 1) No because under Section 47, P.D. 1529, no title fo registered Land in derogation af that o tered tall be acquired by prescription-or adverne Possession. AA similar provision is found in the Civil Code. The reason is that once a piece of land is registered under the ‘Torrens Systom, it operates as a uotice to the whole aa to All persous are bound by it, No one can plead ignorance of the registration. @) ‘The right to recover the land from another person holding it is equally ‘qaptescriptible, the reason being that possession is amere cousequence of ownership. ey while a Torrens Title is imprescriptible, under certain exceptional circumstances, it may yield to the equitable principle of laches. In other words, eertain circumstances such as inaction or utter moglect on the pat of the owuer and the intervention-of rights by third parties may, for reasons of equity, convert the claim of impreSoriptibility into a stale demand (b) To be registerable, a voluntary document affecting registered land must be stficient in law. (Section 51, P.D. 1529) Sufficiency refers to both substance and form. As to form, it is the ROD'S responsibility to check such items as the full name end signature of vendor or grantor, the marital consent of the wife ifthe land sold is conjugal, ‘he full name, nationality, the civil status, the name of spouse, if married, the resident and postal address of the grantee. If the grantee is comporstion, the deed must be accompanied with the Artioles ‘of Incorporation, a baard revolution authorizing the , corporation to buy and another resolution of the Board naming the corporate office authorized to execute and sign the contract. This is not to mention the proper observance of the requirements in fhe acknowledgment portion of the deed. 1989 1, Registration Under P.D. 1529 Q. May the owner of a building constructed on an unregistered land belonging to another apply for the registration of such building under the Land Registration Act and PD. 1529? What should he do to protect his rights in case the owner of the land applied for registration thereof? Give your reason. A. The Land Registration Act and PD 1529 apply to registration of land only. It may include the building ax an accessory but the building cannot be registered independently of the land because registration contemplated under this Act refers only to ownership of land. ‘The owner of the building should file an opposition or answer to the application for registration and ask the court that his right (o the building be annotated in the decree ‘and later in the certificate of ttle, 2. Effect of a Forged Deed of Sale Q. “A” is the owner of a registered land. The Torrens Title is entrusted to “B”, hi clerk secretary, who forges “A’s” signature on a deed of sale of said land in his (B's) favor. A new title is issued in the name of “B” upon registration. Does “B” have a valid title over the land? IF “B” sells the property to “C”, does the latter acquire a valid title over it? A.A Gigad died of sale is-an absolute nul) and conveys it gn be the coat of aft. Ie to the land hs been tansfrred toa party Bed upon a forged deed; aid Tater on after the issuance of such title the property is transferred to another ‘who is an innocent purchacer for value, then the latter acquires a valid title 3. Registration of Accession Q. Subsequent to the #riginal registration of a parcel of land bordering a river, its ‘area was increased by accession. This additional area was not included in the technical description appearing on the Torrens Certificate of Title having been aequired subsequent to the registration proceedings. May such additional area be ®quired by third persons thru prescription? Give your reasons, A. The Land Registration Law provides that no title in derogation of the registered owner may be acquired by adverse possession or acquisitive possession. Since the law refers to registered lands, the accession mentioned iw this question may be acquired by athird person through adverso possession or acquisitive possession. 1990 1. Prescription of Actions Q. In 1960. an unregistered parcel of land was mortgaged by owner O to M, a family friend, as collateral for a loan. Q acted through his attamey-in-fact, son S, who was duly authorized by way of special power of attorney, wherein O declared that he was the absolute owner of the land, that the tax declarsion‘receipts were all issued in his name, and that he has been in open, continuous and adverse possession in the concept of owner. As O was unable to pay back the loan plus interest for the past five(S) years, M hhad to foreclose the morteage, At the foreclosure sale, M was the highest bidder. Upon issuance of the sherif?’s final decd of sale and registration in January, 1966, the mortgage Property was turned over to M's possession and control. M has since then developed the said property. In 1967, O died, survived by sons $ and P. In 1977, after the 10% death anniversary of his father O, son P tiled a suit to annul the mortgage deed and subsequent sale of the property, ete., on the ground of fraud. He asserted that the property in question was conjugal in nature actually belonging, at the time of tha mortgage, to O and his wife, W, whose conjugal shares went to their sons (S. and P) and to 0. (a) Is the suit filed by P barred by prescription? Explain your answer. {b) After the issuance of the sheriff's final deed of sale in 1966 in this case, assuming that M applied for registration under the Torrens System and was issued a Torrens Title to said property in question, would the added fact have any significant effect on your conclusion? State your reason. A. (a) Under Article 173 of the Civil Code, the action is barred by prescription because the wite had only 10 years from transaction and during the marriage to file a suit for the annulment of the mortgage deed. {b) If M had secured a Torrens Title to the land, all the more S and P could not recover because if at all their remedies would be: 1. A petition to Review the Decree of Registration. This ean be availed within 1 year from the entry thereof, but only upon the basis of “actual Frand”. There is no showing that M committed actual fraud in securing his title to the lands or 2. An aglion in personany against for the reconveyance of the tithe in their favour. Again, this remedy is available within four (4) years form the date of the discovery of the fraud but not later than ten (10) years trom the date of registration of the title in the name of M. 2. Indefeasibility of Title Q. In 1950°s, the government acquired a big landed estate in Central Luzon from the registered owner for subdivision into small farms and redistribution of bona fide occupants. F was a Tonner lessee of a parcel of land, five hectares in area Alter completion of the survey and subdivision, F applied to buy the said land in accordance with the guidelines of the implementing agency. Upon full payment of the price in 1957, the corresponding deed of absolute sale was executed in his favour and was registered, and in 1964, a new title was issued in his name. In 1963. F sold the said land to X: and in 1965 X sold it to Y, New titles were successively issued in the names of the said purchasers. In 1977, C filed an action to annul the deeds of sale to F, X, and Y and their titles, on the ground that he Chad been in actual p\physical possession of the land, and that the sale to F and the subsequent sales should be set aside on the ground of fraud. Upon motion of the defendants, the trial court disinissed the complaint, upholding their defeuses of their being innocent purchasers for value, prescription and laches, Plaintift appealed, (a) Is the said appeal meritorious? Explain your answer. (b) Suppose the government agency concerned joined C in fiting the said action against the defendants, would that change the result ofthe litigation? Explain, A. (a) ‘The appeal is not meritorious. The trial court ruled correctly in granting defendants motion to dismiss for the following reasons: 1. While there is possibility thal F, a former lessee of the land was aware of the fact thet C was the bona fide occupant thereof and for this reagon his transfer certificate oftitle may be vuluetable, the transfer of the same land and the issuance of paw TCT"s to X and ¥ who are ipageent purchasers fi “ feasible. A person dealing with registeretttand may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of {itle and the law will not in any way oblige him to go behind the certificate to determine the condition of the property in search for any hidden defect or inchoate right which may tater invalidate or diminish bis right to the land. This is the mitror principle of-the Torrens $s 2. The action to annul the sale was instituted in 1977 or more than ten (4D years from the date of execution thereof in 1957, hence, it has long prescribed 3. Under Section 45 of Act 496, “the entry of certificate of title shall be regarded as an agreement running with the land, and binding upon the applicant and his successors in title thet the land shall be and always remain registered land A title under Act 496 is indefeasible and to preserve that character, the title is eleansed anew with every transtor for value. (De Jesus v. City of Manila, 29 Phil. 73; Laperal v. City of Manila, 62 Phil. 313; Penullar v. PNB, 120 SCRA 111) (b) Even if the government join C, this will not alter the outcome of the case so inuch because of estoppel as an express provision of Section 45 of Act 496 and Section 31 of PD. 1529 that a doorge of registratio ed i nce or thereof “shall_be u Persons. including the naional s ‘and all branches E whether metntoied by naltei the application notice, or not” 1994 1. Annulment of Title Q. Bruce is the registered owner of a parcel of land with a building thereon and is in peacefill possession thereof, He pays the real estate taxes and collects the rentals therefrom. Later, Catalino, the only brother of Bruce, filed a petition where he, misrepresenting to be the attomey-in-fact of Bruce and falsely alleging that the certificate of title was lost, succceded in obtaining a second owner's duplicate copy of the title and then had the same traneferred in his name through a simulated dood of sale in his favor, Catalino then mortgaged the property to Desiderio who had the mortgage annotated on ihe ide. Upon leaming of the fraudulent transaction, Bruce filed a complaint against Catalino and Desiderio to have the title of Catalino and the mortgage in favor of Desiderio declared mull and void ‘Will the complaint prosper, or will the title of Catalino and the mortgage to Desiderio be sustained? A. The complaint for the annulment of Catalino’s title will prosper. In the first place, the second cwner’s copy of the title secured by him fram the Land Registration Court is void ab initio, the owner's copy thereof having never been lost, let alone the Fact Frat said second owner's copy of the title was fraudulently procured and improvidently {saued by the Court, In the second place, the ‘Transfer Certificate of Title procured by Catalino is equally null and void, it having been issued on the basis of a simulated ec forged Deed of Sale. A forged deed is an absolute nullity and conveys no title The morigage in favor of Desiderio is likewise mull and void because the mortgagor is not the owner of the mortgaged property. While it may be tue thal under the “Mirror Principle” of the Torrens System of Land Registration, a buyer or mortgagee hhas the right to rely on what appears on the Certificate of Title, and in the absence of anything to excite suspicion, is under no obligation to look beyond the cortifieate and investigate the mortgagor’s title, this rule does not find application in the case at hand because here, Catalino’s title suffers trom two fatal infirmities, namely: (1) The fact that it emanated from aforged deed of a simulated sale; (2)The fact that it was detived from a fraudulently procured or improvidently issued second owner's copy, the seal over’ copy being sill intact and in the possession of the true owner, Bruce. ‘The mortgage to Desiderio should ba.cansolled without prejudice to his right to 80 afler Cataline-ancor the government for compensation from the assurance fund, 2, Free Patent Q. Maria Enriquez failed to pay the realty taxes on her unregistered agricultural land located in Magdugo, Toledo City. In 1989, to satisty the taxes due, the City sold it at public auction to Juan Miranda, an employee at the Treasurer's Office of said City, whose bid af P10, 000.00 was the highest, In due time, a final bill of sale was executed s4 his favor. Maria refused to tun-over the possession of the property to Juan alleging that: (2) she has been, in the meantime, aranted a free patent and on the basis thereof an Original Certificate of Title was issued to her, and (2) the sale in favor of Juan is void from the beginning in view of the provision in the Administrative Code of 1987 whieh Prohibits officers and employees of the goverument from purchasing directly or indirectly any property sold by the government for non-payment of any tax, fee, or other public charge (a) Is the sale to Juan valid/ If so, what is the eftect of the issuance of the Certificate of Title to Maria? (b) Ifthe sale is void, may Juan recover the P10, 000.00? If not, why not? (©) If the sale is void, did it not nevertheless, operate to divest Maria of her ownership? If it did, who then is the owner of the property? A. (a) The sale of the land {o Juan is not valid, being contrary to law. Therefore, no transfer of ownership of the land was eflected from the delinquent taxpayer to him. The original certificates of title obtained by Maria thru a free patent grant from the Bureau of Lands (under Chapter VII, CA 141) are valid but in view of her delinquency, the said title is subject to the right of the City Government to sell the land at public auction. The issuance of OCT did not exempt the land from the tax sales. Section 44 of PD No. 1529 provides that every registered owner receiving Cettificae of Title shall hold the same free from all encumbrances, subject fo certain exemptions. (b) Juan now may recover because he wae not a patty to the violation of the aw. (©) No, the sale did not divest Maria of her fitle precisely because the sale is void. It is as good as if'no sale ever took place. In tax sales, the owner is divested of his land initially upon award and issuance of a Certificate of Sale, and finally after the Iapse of the one year period from the date of registration, to redeem, upon execution of the Treasurer of an instrument sufficient in form and effects to convey the propesty. Maria remained owner of the land until another tax sale is to be performed in favor of a qualified buyer. 1992 ‘Reopening of Decree of Registration Q. What ae the essential requisites or elements for the allowance of the reopening or review of adecree of registration? A. The essential elements are: (1) that the petitioner has a real or dominical right; (2) that he has been deprived threof through fraud: (3) that the petition is filed within one (1) year from the isstance of the decree; and (4) that the property has not yet beon transferred to an innocent purchaser (Rublico vs. Orellana 30 SCRA 511: Libudan vs. Gil 43 SCRA 17), 1994 Concepts Q (a) What is the procedure of consulta when an instrument is denied registration? (b) Distinguish the Torrens System of land registration from the system of recording of evidence of title. (©) How do you register now a deed of mortgage of a parcel of land originally registered under the Spanish Mortgage Law? A. (a) (1) The Register of Deeds shall notify the interested party in writng, sotting forth the defects of the instrument or the legal ground relied upon the for denying the registration, and advising that if he is not agreeable to such ruling, he may, without withdrawing the documents from the Registry, elevate the matter by Consulta to the Administrator of the Land Registration Authority (LRA). (2) Within five (5) days from receipt of notice of denial, the party in interest shall file Consulta with the Register of Deeds concemed and pay the consulta fee (3) After receipt of the Consulta and payment of the corresponding fee, the Register of Deeds makes an annotation of the pending consulta at the back of the certificate of title. (4) The Register of Deeds then elevates the case to the LRA Administrator with certified records thereof and a summary of the facts and issues involved. (5) The LRA Administrator then conducts hearings afler due notice or may just require parties to submit their memoranda. (6) After hearing, the LRA Administrator issues an order preseiibing the step tobe taken or the memorandum to be made. His resolution in consulta shall be conclusive and binding upon all Register of Deeds unless reversed on appeal by the Cout of Appeals or by the Supreme Court, ( Section 117, P.D 1529) (b) The Torrens system of land registration is a system for the registration of tile of land, Thus, under this system what is entered in the Registry of Deeds, is a record of the owner’s estate or interest in the Land, unlike the system under the Spanish Mortgage Laweor the system under Section 194 of the Revised Administrative Code as amended by Act 3344 where only the evidence‘of such title is recorded, In the latter system, what is recorded is the deed of conveyance trom hence the owner's title emanated-and not the title itself. (©) After the Spanish Mortgage Law was abrogated by PD 892 on Februay 16, 1976, all lands covered by Spanish titles that were not brought under the Torrens system within six (6) months from the date thereof have been considered as “unregistered private tande” ‘Thus, a deed of mortgage affecting land originally registered under the ‘Spanish Mortgage Law is now governed by the system of registration of transactions or instruments affecting unregistered land under Section 194 Revised Administrative Code as amended by Act No, 3344. Under this law, the instrument or transaction affecting unregistered lnnd is entered in a book provided for the purpose but the registration thereof is purely voluntary and does not adversely aifect third persons who have a better right, 1995 Reconveyance . Rommel was issued a certificate of ttle over a parcel of land in Quezon City One year later, Rachelle, the legitimate owner of the land, discovered the frandulece Wesistration obtained by Rommel. She filed a complaint again Rommel. fer Feonveyance and caused the annotation of a notice of lis pendens on the certificate of lille issued to Rommel. Rommel now invokes the indefeasibiity af his title considering that one yeur has already olapsed from its iasuaneo. He also seeks the caneellaien are notice of lis pendens (a) Will Rachelle’s Suit for reconveyance prosper? Explain, (0) May the court cancel the notice of lis pendens even betore final judgment is rendered? Explain A. (a) Yes, Rachelle’s suit will prosper because all elements for an action for Teconveyance are present, namely: (2) Rachelle is claiming dominical rights over the same land. (2) Rommel procured his title to the land by fraud G) The action was brought within the statutory period of four years trom discovery of the fraud and not later than ten years from the date of registration of Rommel’s ttle (4) Title to the land had not passed into the hands of an innocent purchaser for value. apts Rommel eayinivoke the indefeasibility of his ttle if Rachelle had filed a petition to Feview\the decrse of registration, But Rachelle instead filed an ordinary action ia parsoriam for reconveyance. In the latter action, indefeasibiity is not a valid

    You might also like