Condensed Notes 2nd Exam

CONDENSED NOTES BASED ON AGCAOILI LAND TITLES AND DEED
Balderas.Domingo.Fabula.Mangadlao.Melendrez.Pastor.Vega
II. CLASSIFICATIONS OF PUBLIC LANDS
1. Classification of public lands is an executive prerogative.
Classification under the 1935 Constitution
a. Agricultural Lands
b. Forest/Timber Lands
c. Mineral Lands
intended for public use or for public service forms part

of the patrimonial property of the State.
(3) Classification of Public Lands According to alienability
Sec. 2, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution Only agricultural lands of the
public domain may be alienated; all natural resources may not
be.

b. Industrial or Commercial Lands
c. Residential Lands
d. Resettlement
e. Mineral Lands
f. Forest/Timber Lands
g. Grazing Lands
h. Such other cases as may be provided by law
(4) Categories of Alienable and Disposable Lands

CASE: Malabanan v. Republic
2 Classes of A & D Lands
a. Patrimonial Lands of the State, or those classified as
lands of private ownership under Art. 425 of the Civil
Code, without limitation; and
b. Lands of the Public Domain, or the Public Lands, as
provided by the constitution with the limitation that the
lands must only be agricultural.

b. Forest/ Timber Lands
c. Mineral Lands
d. Agricultural Parks
CA No. 141 ( Public Land Act, Enacted on November

7, 1936) is the general law governing the classification
and disposition of lands of the public domain, other
than timber and mineral lands.
How public land may be acquired? (Republic V. Fabio )

a. Purchase from the State
b. Grant by the State
c. Other modes of acquisition recognized by law
(5) Requirements to establish classification
(1) System of Classification

CASE: Malabanan v. Republic - The President is authorized
from time to time to classify the lands of the public domain into
alienable and disposable, timber or mineral lands. Alienable and
disposable lands of the public domain are further classified
according to their uses into:
a. Agricultural;
b. Residential, commercial, industrial, or other similar
purposes;
c. Educational, charitable, or other similar purposes; or
d. Reservations for town sites and for public and quasipublic uses
CASE: Republic V. Fabio It is not enough for the PENRO

or CENRO to certify that the land is alienable and
disposable (A and D). The applicant for Land Registration
must prove that the DENR Secretary had approved the
Land Classification and released the land of the Public
Domain as Alienable and Disposable land and that the land
falls within the land classification as verified through the
survey by the PENRO or CENRO.
-- Applicant must present certified copy of the DENR
Secretarys Declaration or the Presidents Proclamation
classifying the land as alienable and disposable.
Sec. 6, CA No. 141 The President through a

presidential proclamation or executive order can
classify or reclassify land to be included or excluded
from the public domain
Secretary of the DENR Apart from the President, the
Secretary of the DENR is the only other public official
empowered by law to approve land classification and
declare such land as alienable and disposable.
DAO No. 20, May 30, 1998 CENRO may issue

certificates of land classification status for areas below
50 has. and for those above 50 has. the issuance of
such certificates is within the function of the PENRO.
(6) Only A & D Lands may be subject of disposition

Pertinent provisions of CA no. 141
a. Sec. 2 The provisions of this Act applies to lands of
public domain; timber and mineral lands shall be
governed by special laws. (meaning the
provisions apply mainly to agricultural lands (?))
b. Sec. 6 Classification: Agricultural; Timber/Forest;
and Mineral; Reclassification may be done anytime.
c. Sec. 8 Limits A D lands only to those lands which
have been officially delimited and classified
d. Sec. 9 Classification according to purpose
(2) Classification of Land According to Ownership

Land is considered of public dominion if:
a. It is intended fro public use; or
b. It belongs to the state, without being for public use and
is intended for some public service or for the
development of the national wealth.
If public land is removed from the ambit of public

dominion, a declaration of such conversion must be:
made in the form of a law duly enacted by the
Congress; or
by a Presidential proclamation in cases where the
President is duly authorized by law to that effect
Until the Executive Department exercises its
prerogative to classify or reclassify lands or until
congress or the president declares that the state no
longer intends the land to be used for public service or
for the development of national wealth.
Land belonging to the state that is not of such

character, or although of such character but no longer

e.
Sec. 10 The words alienation, disposition, or

concession as used in this act shall mean anhy of the
methods authorized by this act for the
acquisition, lease, use or benefit of the lands of the
public
domain other than timber or mineral lands
Sec. 8, trial courts had jurisdiction to adjudicate these lands to

private parties.
CASE: Heirs of Amunategui v. Director of Forestry Unless and

until the land classified as forest is released in an official
proclamation to that effect so that it may form part of the
disposable agricultural lands of the public domain, the rules on
confirmation of imperfect tile do not apply.
3. Burden of proof rests with applicant to overcome

presumption of state ownership
CASE: Sec. of DENR V. YAP
To prove that the land subject of an application for registration
is alienable, the applicant must establish the existence of:
a. A positive act of the government such as presidential
procalamation or an executive order;
b. An administrative action;
c. Investigation reports of the Bureau of Lands
Investigators; and
d. A legislative act or a statute.
e. Applicant may also secure a certification from the
government that the land claimed to have been
possessed for the required number of years is
alienable and disposable.
CASE: Hermanos v. CA - Applicant has the burden to prove that
the land he claims to have possessed as owner are alienable
and disposable.
(7) Classification of Boracay Island

CASE: Sec. of DENR v. Yap
Matters of classification
and reclassification of lands cannot be assumed.
P.D. 705 (revided Forestry Code) respects titles

already existing prior to its effectivity.
Proclamation No. 1064, May 22, 2006 proclamation

issued by President Arroyo classifying Boracxay
Island into 400 has. Of reserved forest (for protection
purposes) and 628.96 has. Of alienable and
disposable agricultural land.
(8) Public Land and Government Land Distinguished

CASE: Montano v. Insular Government
CASE: Republic v. AFP RSBS Any title issued covering nondisposable lots even in the hands of an alleged innocent
purchaser for value shall be cancelled.
Public Land equivalent to public domain, and does not by any

means include all lands of government ownership, but only so
much as all lands as are thrown open to private appropriation
and settlement by homestead and other like general laws.
CASE: Heirs of Amunategui v. Director of Forestry The ruling

in this case governs applications overcoming the presumption
that the land sought to be registered forms part of the public
domain. ( as cited in Director of Lands v. Funtilar)
--------------
Government Land- includes not only public lands but also other
lands of the government already reserved or devoted to public
use or subject to private rights.
Philippine Bill of 1902, and the first Public Land Act

No. 926 there was yet no legal provision esting in the
chief executive the power to classify lands of the public
domain into mineral, timber, or agricultural. Hence the
presumption --- that courts are allowed to make such
classification, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, in each case that lands are agricultural.
The Government owns real estate which is part of the

public lands and other real estate which is not a part
thereof.
III. Non- Registrable Properties

1. Property of the Public Domain
(9) Cadastral Survey of a municipality Does not

automatically classify lands within the cadastre as A & D
Property of the Public Dominion - refers to things held by the

State by Regalian right. These are things Res Publicae innature
hence incapable of public appropriation.
CASE: Director of Lands v. CA and Valeriano A survey made

in a cadastral proceeding merely identifies each lot preparatory
to a judicial proceeding for adjudication of title to any of the lands
upon claim of interested parties. If land is within the jurisdiction
of the Bureau of Forest Development, it would be beyond the
jurisdiction of the Cadastral Court top register it under the
Torrens System.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Art. 420, Civil Code - The following are properties of the public
dominion:
A. Those intended for public use such as:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
2. Under the Spanish Regime, all Crown lands were per se

alienable and subject to adjudication by the courts.
Exclusion in Sec. 8 of Act 2874 recognizes that during the
Spanish Regime, all Crown lands were per se alienable unless
falling under timber or mineral zones, or otherwise reserved for
some public purpose in accordance with the law. Thus with
respect to lands excluded from the classification requirement in
Roads;
Canals;
Rivers;
Torrents;
Ports, and Bridges constructed by the State;
Banks;
Shores;
Roadsteads, and others of similar character.

(4) Ownership of Waters
P.D. No. 1067 the Water Code of the Philippines, Dec. 13,
1976; repealed Art. 502 518 of the Civil Code on
Waters.
B. Those which belong to the State, without being for public use,
and are:
a.
b.
intended for some public service; or

for development of national wealth.
Art. 5, PD 1067 - The following (waters) belong to the State:

a. Rivers and their natural beds;
b. Continuous or intermittent waters of springs and
brooks running in their natural beds and the beds
themselves;
c. Natural lakes and lagoons;
d. All other categories of surface waters such as water
flowing over lands, water from rainfall whether natural,
or artificial, and water from agriculture runoff, seepage
and drainage;
e. Atmospheric water;
f. Subterranean or ground waters; and,
g. Seawater.
(1) Land intended for public use or service not available for
private appropriation All other property of the state which is
not of the character mentioned above, is patrimonial property.
(2) Patrimonial Property
Art. 422, Civil Code property of public dominion, when no
longer needed for public use or for public service, shall from part
of the patrimonial property of the state.
Public Domain lands become patrimonial property when:
a. there is a declaration by the executive department that
these are A & D; and
b. there is an express manifestation by the government
that he property is already patrimonial or no longer
retained for public service or for the development of
National Wealth
Art. 6, PD 1067 - The following waters found on private lands

belong to the State:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Art. 113, Civil Code All things which are within the commerce
of man are susceptible to prescription, and that property of the
state or any of its subdivisions not patrimonial in character shall
not be the object of prescription.
(5) A and D lands held by government entities under Sec.

60, CA No. 141
CASE: CHAVEZ v. PEA - The registration of lands of the public
domain under the Torrens system, by itself, cannot convert
public lands into private lands. Jurisprudence holding that upon
the grant of the patent or issuance of the certificate of title the
alienable land of the public domain automatically becomes
private land cannot apply to government units and entities.
Art. 424, Civil Code property for public use in the provinces,
cities, and municipalities consists of:
a. provincial roads;
b. city streets;
c. municipal streets;
d. the squares;
e. fountains;
f. pubic waters;
g. promenades; and
h. public works for public service paid for by said
provinces, cities, and municipalities
Continuous or intermittent waters rising on such lands;

Lakes and lagoons naturally occurring on such lands;
Rain water falling on such lands;
Subterranean or ground waters; and
Water in swamps and marshes
Section 60 of CA No. 141 constitutes, under Section 44

of PD No. 1529, a statutory lien affecting title of the
registered land even if not annotated on the certificate
of title.
alienable lands of the public domain held by
government entitles under Section 60 of CA No.
141 remain public lands because they cannot be
alienated or encumbered unless Congress passes
a law authorizing their disposition. Congress,
however, cannot authorize the sale to private
corporations of reclaimed alienable lands of the
public domain because of the constitutional ban.
Alienable lands of the public domain must be

transferred to qualified
private parties, or to
government entities not tasked to dispose of public
lands, before these lands can become private or
patrimonial lands.
All other property possessed by any of them is

patrimonial and shall be governed by the Civil Code,
without prejudice to the provisions of special laws.
(3) Land may be alienated when no longer needed for public

use or service
CASE: Laurel V. Garcia Issue: Roppongi Property in Tokyo,
Japan
Art. 422, Civil Code Property of public dominion retains such
character until formally declared otherwise.
In the case the court held: the fact that the Roppongi Site has
not been used for a long time for actual embassy service does
not automatically convert it to Patrimonial Property. Any such
conversion happens only if the property is withdrawn from public
use.
- A property continues to be part of the public domain, not
available for private appropriation or ownership until there is a
formal declaration on the part of the government to withdraw it
from being such.
(6) Lands titled in the name of government entities form part

of the public domain.
Section 48, Chapter 12, Book I of the Revised Administrative
Code of 1987 states:

SEC. 48. Official Authorized to Convey Real Property.
Whenever real property of the government is authorized
by law to be conveyed, the deed of conveyance shall be
executed in behalf of the government by the following:
CASE: Government of the Phil. Islands v. Abella Whether the

particular land is agricultural, forestry, or mineral is a question to
be settled in each particular case unless the Bureau of Forestry
has, under the authority conferred upon it, prior to the
intervention of private interest, set aside for forestry or mineral
purposes the particular land in question.
(2) For property belonging to the Republic of the Philippines, but

titled in the name of any political subdivision or of any corporate
agency or instrumentality, by the executive head of the agency
or instrumentality.
(3) Sec. 48(b), CA No. 141, applies only to A and D lands

This is inapplicable to Forest Lands
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples:
a. private property purchased by the national government
for expansion of a public wharf may be titled in the
name of a governmentcorporation regulating port
operations in the country;
b. private property purchased by the national government
for expansion of an airport may also be titled in the
name of the government agency tasked to administer
the airport;
c. private property donated to a municipality for use as:
1. a town plaza; or
2. public school site
-may likewise be titled in the name of the
municipality.
3. Watersheds
CASE: STA. ROSA Realty Devt. Corp v. CA a Watershed is
the area drained by a river and its tributaries and enclosed by a
boundary pr divide which separates it from adjacent watersheds.
Most important product of a watershed is WATER.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------4. Mangrove swamps
CASE: Montano v. Insular Government- mangrove swamps or
manglares are. . . mud flats, alternately washed and exposed
by the tide, in which grows various kindred plants which will not
live except when watered by the sea, extending their roots deep
into the mud and casting their seeds, which also germinate
there..
These properties, however, become properties of the

public domain, although, if already registered under Act
No. 496 or PD No. 1529, they remain registered land.
CASE: Director of Forestry v. Villareal Mangrove swamps are

forestall and not alienable agricultural land
Section 85, PD No. 1529 - authorizes the Register of

Deeds to issue in the name of the national government
new certificates of title covering such expropriated
lands. Consequently, lands registered under Act No.
496 or PD No. 1529 are not exclusively private or
patrimonial lands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 1820, Administrative Code of 1917, October 1, 1917 public forest includes, except as otherwise specially indicated,
all unreserved public land, including nipa and mangrove
swamps, and all forest reserves of whatever character.
CASE: Ynson v. Sec. of Agriculture and Natural Resources - the
Bureau of Fisheries has no jurisdiction to dispose of
swamplands or mangrove lands forming part of the public
domain while such lands are still classified as forest lands.
-------5. Mineral lands
RA No. 7942 Philippine Mining Act of 1995 provides:
2. Forest lands
CASE: Republic V. CA and Lastimado - If the land forms part of
the public forest, possession thereof, however long, cannot
convert it into private property as it is within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Bureau of Forest Development and beyond the
power and jurisdiction of the registration court.
SEC. 4. Ownership of Mineral Resources. Mineral resources

are owned by the State and the exploration, development, and
processing thereof shall be under its full control and supervision.
The State may directly undertake such activities or it may enter
into mineral agreements with contractors.
CASE: Director of Lands v. Abanzado Forest lands cannot be

alienated to private persons or entitites.
(1) Conservation of natural resources
CASE: Alvarez v. Pico Resources Inc. - Principal Instruments
by which the State regulates the utilization and disposition of
forest: a. Timber Lincenses;
b.Permits; and c. License
Agreements
The State shall recognize and protect the rights of the

indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands as
provided for by the Constitution.
Important points:
a. Mineral resources are owned by the State.
b. Possession of mineral land does not confer possessory
rights
c. Ownership of land does not extend to minerals
underneath
d. Land cannot be partly mineral and partly agricultural
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------6. Natural resources within ancestral domains.
These instruments may be validly amended, modified,

replaced, or rescinded bythe Chief Executive when
national interests so require.
(2) Classification of land is descriptive of its legal nature,
not what it actually looks like
CASE: Heirs of Amunategui V. Director of Forestry - A forested
area classified as forest land of the public domain does not lose
such classification simply because loggers or settlers may have
stripped it of its forest cover.

RA No. 8371 ( IPRA Law ) Indigenous peoples have priority
rights in the harvesting, extraction, development., pr exploitation
of any natural resources within the ancestral domains.
7. National Parks - Land reserved for a national park cannot be
registered. They are neither susceptible to disposition under the
provisions of the Public Land Act (CA No. 141) nor registrable
under the Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529).
CASE: Republic V. AFP - RSBS National parks shall be

conserved and may not be increased nor diminished except by
law.
CASE: Palomo v. CA - where a certificate of title covers a

portion of land within the area reserved for park purposes, the
title should be annulled with respect to said portion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8. Military or naval reservation
CASE: Republic v. Marcos - Lands inside a military or naval
reservation cannot be the object of registration
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Foreshore lands and reclaimed lands

CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Republic Real Estate
Corporation - "foreshore land has been invariably defined as
that strip of land that lies between the high and low water marks
and that is alternately wet and dry according to the flow of the
tide or that part of the land adjacent to the sea which is
alternately covered by the ordinary flow of the tides.
d.
Foreshore lands and submerged lands (which may be

the subject of reclamation) are inalienable unless
declared by law to be alienable and disposable
portions of the public domain.
CA No. 141 - the National Assembly passed the Public

Land Act, which authorized the lease, but not the sale,
of reclaimed lands of the government to corporations
and individuals. CA No. 141 continues to this day as
the general law governing the classification and
disposition of lands of the public domain.
o
o
CASE: Republic v. Alagad - If the parcel registered in the names

of respondents were foreshore land, the land registration court
could not have validly awarded title thereto. It would have been
without the authority to do so. And the fact that the Bureau of
Lands had failed to appeal from the decree of registration could
not have validated
the courts decision, which was rendered without jurisdiction.
o
(1) Development of the law governing foreshore/reclaimed
lands
CASE: Chavez v. Public Estates Authority
a.
Spanish Law of Waters of 1866 - first statutory law

governing the ownership and disposition of reclaimed
lands in the Philippines;
b.
Act No. 1654, enacted on May 18, 1907 enacted by

the Philippine Commission; provided for the lease, but
not the sale, of reclaimed lands of the government to
corporations and individuals.
c.
Section 6
- authorized the GovernorGeneral to classify lands of the public domain
into .
. .alienable or disposable
lands.
Section 7
- empowered theGovernorGeneral to declare what lands are open to
disposition or concession.
Section 8
- limited alienable or
disposable lands only to those lands which
have been
officially delimited and
classified.
Section 56
stated
that
lands
disposable under this title shall be classified
as
government
reclaimed,
foreshore and marshy
lands, as well as other
lands. All these lands,
however, must be suitable
for residential, commercial,
industrial
or
other
productive non-agricultural
purposes.
Section 10
- the term disposition
includes lease of the land.
Section 58
- categorically mandated
that disposable lands of the public domain
classified
as government reclaimed,
lands shall be disposed of
to private parties by lease
only and not otherwise.
Section 59(d)
- the government could sell
to private parties only those lands falling
under
this section, or those lands
for
non-agricultural
purposes not classified as
government
reclaimed,
disposable lands of the
public domain
Section 61
- allowed only the lease of
such lands to private parties.
(2) State policy

CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Republic Real Estate
Corporation - Justice Puno summarized the law on the
disposition of foreshore lands as follows:
Act No. 2874, enacted on November 29, 1919 - the

Philippine Legislature approved the Public Land Act,
which authorized the lease, but not the sale, of
reclaimed lands of the government to corporations and
individuals.

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Foreshore lands are lands of public dominion intended

for public use. So too are lands reclaimed by the
government
Act 1654 allowed only the leasing of reclaimed land.
The Public Land Acts of 1919 and 1936 also declared
that the foreshore and lands reclaimed by the
government were to be disposed of to private parties
by lease only and not otherwise.
Before leasing, the Governor-General, upon
recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture and
Natural Resources, had first to determine that the land
reclaimed was not necessary for the public service.
Foreshore and lands under water were not to be
alienated and sold to private parties.
Disposition of the reclaimed land was only by lease.
The land remained property of the State.
are the only natural resources that the State may

alienate
CASE: Government of the Phils. V. Cabangis - where the lots
in question disappeared on account of the gradual erosion due
to the ebb and flow of the tide, and remained in such state until
reclaimed from the sea by the filling done by the Government,
they are public land.
Disappearance of land is due to natural erosion.

CASE: Buzon V. Insular Government where the sea covered
the land in dispute is because of the action of the tide but the
fact that a large quantity of sand was taken from the sea at the
side of the land in order to fill in a street entirely independent of
the will of the owner, the latter could not lose ownership thereof.
(6) Laws governing reclamation
RA No. 1899 (June 22, 1957) - authorized the reclamationof
foreshore lands by chartered cities and municipalities.
(3) Congressional authority - the only way the government can

sell to private parties government reclaimed and marshy
disposable lands of the public domain is for the legislature to
pass a law authorizing such sale.
Pertinent provisions:
Sec. 1 - Authority is hereby granted to all municipalities,

and chartered cities to undertake and carry out at their
own expense the reclamation dredging, filling, or other
means, of any foreshore lands bordering them, and to
establish, provide, construct, maintain and repair
proper and adequate docking and harbor facilities as
such municipalities and chartered cities may determine
in consultation with the Secretary of Finance and the
Secretary of Public Works and Communications.
Section 60, CA No. 141 - expressly requires congressional

authority before lands under Section 59, which the
government previously transferred to government units or
entities, could be sold to private parties.
- exempts government units and entities from the maximum
area of public lands that could be acquired from the State.
(4) Land invaded by the sea is foreshore land and belongs

to the State
Sec. 2 - Reclaimed lands shall be the property of the

municipality/ charted city
- Foreshore land along such reclaimed lands
remains to be the property of the national
government
Sec. 4 - Reclaimed lands used for the following,

cannot be sold/leased:
Wharves
Piers and embankments
Roads
Parks and other public improvements
CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Morato - When the sea

moved towards the estate and the tide invaded it, the invaded
property became foreshore land and passed to the realm of the
public domain.
Other Jurisprudence:
a. Registration of the land subject of cadastral
proceedings was annulled when the land subsequently
became foreshore land.
b. Registration decree of a trial court was voided because
the trial court has no jurisdication to award foreshore
lands to any private person or entity.
1.
2.
3.
4.
PD No. 3-A, January 11, 1973 - revoked all laws authorizing the
reclamation of areas under water, whether foreshore or inland,
and revested solely in the national government the power to
reclaim lands.
- repealed Sec. 5 of the Spanish Laws of Water of 1866
- reclamation can be undertaken only by a person contracted by
the national government
Where a certificate of title is issued for a foreshore land,

the Republic has legitimate reason to demand its
cancellation and the land reverted to the State. In that
case, res judicata or estoppels is no defense.
(5) Submerged areas

CASE: Chavez v. Public Estates Authority
Submerged areas - form part of the public domain, and in that
state, are inalienable and outside the commerce of man.
Until reclaimed from the sea, these submerged
areas are, under the Constitution, waters . . .
owned by the State, forming part of the public
domain and consequently inalienable.
Only when actually reclaimed from the sea can
these submerged areas be classified as public
agricultural lands, which under the Constitution
(7) The Public Estates Authority - authorized to reclaim both

foreshore and submerged areas of the public domain
o PD No. 1084 - issued on On February 4, 1977 created
the Public Estates Authority (PEA), renamed Philippine
Reclamation Authority pursuant to EO No. 380, dated
October 26, 2004.
o EO No. 525 - issued on February 14, 1979, designated
PEA as the national governments implementing arm to
undertake all reclamation projects of the government,

o
Section 60, CA No. 141 - In order that PEA may sell its
reclaimed foreshore and submerged alienable lands of
the public domain, there must be legislative authority
empowering PEA to sell these lands. This legislative
authority is necessary in view of Section 60 of CA No.
141
o Section 3, Article XII, 1987 Constitution - PEA cannot
sell any of its alienable or disposable lands of the public
domain to private corporations since Constitution
expressly prohibits such sales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10. Lakes
CASE: Republic v. Reyes - the free patents and certificates of
title issued to the applicants covering portions of the lake, due
to misrepresentations and false reports, should be cancelled.
- Any false statement in an application for public land shall ipso
facto produce the cancellation of the title granted.
- Possession of non-disposable land does not divest the land of
its public character.
not susceptible to private appropriation and acquisitive

prescription, and as a public water, it cannot be registered under
the Torrens system in the name of any individual.
CASE: Mangaldan v. Manaoag - The construction of irrigation
dikes on a creek which prevents the water from flowing, or
converts it into a fishpond, does not alter or change the nature
of the creek as a property of the public domain.
A dried up creek is property of public dominion.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------13. Reservations for public and semi-public purposes.
Section 83 of CA No. 141 - Upon recommendation of

the Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources,
the President may designate by proclamation any tract
or tracts of land ofthe public domain as reservations for
the use of the Republic of the Philippines or of any of
its branches, or of the inhabitants thereof, in
accordance with regulations prescribed for this
purpose, or for quasi-public uses or purposes when the
public interest requires it, including:
a. reservations for highways;
b. rights of way for railroads;
c. hydraulic power sites;
d. irrigation systems;
e. communal pastures or leguas communales;
f. public parks;
g. public quarries;
h. public fishponds;
i. workingmens village; and
j. jother improvements for the public benefit.
Laguna Lake Development Authority - authorized to

reclaim or cause to be reclaimed portions of the lake or
undertake reclamation projects and/or acquire such
bodies of land from the lake subject to the approval of
the NEDA Board.
- the land so reclaimed shall be the property of the
Authority and title thereto shall be vested in the
Authority
- the resulting lake shore shall continue to be owned
by the national government
Area beyond the natural bed of the Laguna de Bay may

be registered
-the provisions of the Law of Waters regulating the
ownership and use of the waters of the sea are not
applicable to the ownership and use of lakes, which are
governed by special provisions
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11. Navigable rivers
CASE: Republic v. Sioson - Navigable rivers cannot be
appropriated and registered under the Torrens system. If the
land forms part of the bed of a navigable stream, creek or river,
the decree and title in the name of the applicants would not give
them any right or title to it.
CASE: Martinez v. Court of Appeals - A land registration court

has no jurisdiction over non-registerable properties, such as
public navigable rivers which are parts of the public domain, and
cannot validly adjudge the registration of title thereof in favor of
a private applicant.
Section 14, Chapter 4, Book III, Administrative Code of

1987 (EO 292)
(1) The President shall have the power to reserve for
settlement or public use, and for specific public
purposes, any of the lands of the public domain, the
use of which is not otherwise directed by law. The
reserved land shall thereafter remain subject to the
specific public purpose indicated until otherwise
provided by law or proclamation.
(2) He shall also have the power to reserve from sale
or other disposition and for specific public uses or
purposes, any land belonging to the private domain of
the Government, or any of the Friar lands, the use of
which is not otherwise directed by law, and thereafter
such land shall be used for the purposes specified by
such proclamation until otherwise provided by law.
CASE: Republic, rep. by the Mindanao Medical Center v. CA where the President, as authorized by law, issues a
proclamation reserving certain lands, and warning all persons to
depart therefrom, this terminates any rights previously acquired
in such lands by a person who has settled thereon in order to
obtain a preferential right of purchase.And patents for lands
which have been previously granted, reserved from sale, or
appropriated, are void.
CASE: Lovina v. Moreno - RA No. 2056 authorizes removal of

unauthorized dikes or obstructions on public navigable streams
as public nuisances or as prohibited constructions, because
the bed of navigable streams is public property, and ownership
thereof is not acquirable by adverse possession.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12. Creeks
CASE: Mercado v. Reyes - A creek, defined as a recess or arm
extending from a river and participating in the ebb and flow of
the sea, is a property belonging to the public domain which is
CASE: Republic v. Octobre - the President, upon

recommendation of the Secretary of Environment and Natural
Resources, shall from time to time make the classifications
provided for in this section (Sec. 9, CA 141), and may, at any
time and in a similar manner, transfer lands from one class to
another.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------IV. Specific Evidence of Ownership
1. Proof of Ownership, generally
CASE: Republic v. East Silverlane Realty Devt Corp A person
who seeks the registration of title to a piece of land on the basis
of possession by himself and his predecessors-in- interest must
prove his claim by clear and convincing evidence; he must prove
his title and not rely on the absence or weakness of the evidence
of the oppositors.
be made to stand in the way of their own

implementation.
--- The land sought to be registered was declared
alienable and disposable 33 years ago. It is not forest
land. It has been possessed and cultivated by the
applicants and their predecessors for at least three
generations. The attempts of humble people to have
disposable lands they have been tilling for generations
titled in their names should not only be viewed with an
understanding attitude but should, as a matter of
policy, be encouraged.
CASE: Laragan v. Court of Appeals- An applicant for registration

must show, even in the absence of opposition, to the satisfaction
of the court, that he is the absolute owner, in fee simple.
(5) Evidence deemed sufficient to establish classification of

land as A and D land
CASE: Republic v. Sayo Mere initiation of an application for

registration of land under the torrens system is not proof that the
land is of private ownership and pertaining to the public domain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASE: Republic v. Serrano - The following may be considered

sufficient to establish the classification
of land as alienable and disposable land for purposes oforiginal
registration:
1. Certification of the Bureau of Forest Devt that the land has
been released as alienable and disposable land.
2. Land Classification Map showing that the land lies within A &
D portion of the public domain.
3. Executive proclamation withdrawing from a reservation a
specific area and declaring the same open for entry, sale or
other mode of disposition.
4. Legislative act or executive proclamation reserving a portion
of the public domain for public or quasi-public use, which
amounts to a transfer of ownership to the grantee.
2. Land must be classified as A and D land.

(1) Sec. 48(b), CA No. 141, is premised on prior
classification of land as A and D
CASE:Director of Lands v. Funtilar - where the area sought to
be registered is around 23 hectares larger than that indicated on
the survey plan from which applicants claim of ownership
sprung, the ruling in Amunategui must be given strict
application. Since the applicant failed to present any proof that
the land in question has been classified as and forms part of the
disposable public domain, whatever possession he might have
had, and however long, cannot ripen into private ownership, and
his failure to adduce clear and convincing evidence of his claim
over the land has given rise to the presumption that the land is
still part of the public domain.
CASE: Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court and
Acme - a private corporation, may apply for judicial confirmation
of the land without need of a separate confirmation proceeding
for its predecessors-in-interest first.
Open, exclusive and undisputed possession of

alienable public land for the period prescribed by CA
No. 141 ipso jure converts such land into private land.
(6) DENR Memorandum No. 654 Authorizes CENRO to issue

certificate that land is A & D.
DAO No. 564 in relation to DENR Admin Order No. 2012-09was issued clarifying that the issuance of the required
certification to prove that the land subject of application for
registration is within the competence and jurisdiction of the
CENRO.
- The administrative issuance is deemed complimentary to the
requirement in Republic v. T.A.N. Properties Inc., in the sense,
that if the CENRO has certified that the land has been classified
as A & D, it may no longer be necessary to submit a certified
copy of the original classification approved by the DENR
Secretary.
(2) Classification of agricultural public land as A and D

reckoned at the time of filing of application for registration
CASE: Republi v. CA and Naguit It is only necessary that the
land is classified as A and D at the time of the filing of the
application for registration
DAO 20, May 30, 1998 Delineates the functions and

authorities of the offices within the DENR.
a. CENRO 50 has.
b. PENRO over 50 has
(3) Naguit reaffirmed in Malabanan v. Republic
DAO 38 It is beyond CENROs the authority of CENRO to

certify the 50-has. or overis alienable and disposable.
The Regional Technical Director , FMS DENR, has no

authorityunder Dao 20 and 38 to issue certificated of
land registration.
(4) Regalian doctrine should be applied with due regard to

the provisions on social justice
A strict application of the case of Heirs of Amunategui

v. Director of Forestry (supra) ruling is warranted
whenever a portion of the public domain is in danger of
ruthless exploitation, fraudulent titling, or other
questionable practices.
But when an application appears to enhance the very
reasons behind the enactment of Act No. 496, PD No.
1529 and CA No. 141, then their provisions should not
(7) Evidence deemed Insufficient to show the prior

classification and release of Land as A & D
a. Mere recommendation of the District Forester for
release of subject property from the unclassified region
(Director of Lands v. CA and Valeriano);

b.
Conversion of subject property into a fish pond, or

titling properties around it;
c. Approved survey plan of mangrove swamps by the
Director of Lands; Such approval is unethical because
it is the Director of Forest Development who has the
authority to determine whether forest land is more
valuable for agricultural rather than forestry uses;
d. The cadastral survey of a municipality ( Director of
Forestry V. Villareal);
e. Certifications made by minor functionaries who have
no authority like the City Development Coordinator (
Republic v. Bacus);
f. A surveyors annotation that the land inside a project
classified as A & D ( Republic v. Dela Paz);
g. The notation of the surveyor- geodetic engineer on the
plan that this survey is inside the A & D area ( Republic
v. Raneses)
---------------------------------------
Pertinent provisions of the Revised Administrative Code

governing private land surveys read:
3. Survey Plan
CASE: SM Prime Holdings Inc. v. Madayag- A survey plan
establishes the true identity of the land to ensure that it does not
overlap a parcel of land or a portion thereof already covered by
a previous land registration, and to forestall the possibility that it
will be overlapped by a subsequent registration of any
overlapping land.
SEC. 1860. Demarcation of boundaries. Surveyors shall

define the boundaries of the lands, surveyed for registration
purposes, by means of monuments placed thereon and shall
indicate on the maps or plats the respective boundaries as
designated, both by the applicant for the survey and adverse
claimants of adjoining properties;
- demarcation of the boundaries of the lands as occupied by the
said applicant need not be suspended because of the
presentation of any complaint or objection.
SEC. 1858. Private land surveys. The Bureau of Lands may,

upon application therefor, make private land
surveys, for which a reasonable charge shall be made.
- Private land surveys may also be made by private land
surveyors, duly qualified as hereinafter provided;
- but no plan of such survey, whether it be original or subdivision,
shall be admitted in land registration proceedings until approved
by the Director of Lands.
SEC. 1859. Procedure incident to making of survey notice to
adjoining owners. The surveyors employed to make surveys
for registration purposes, or to prepare maps and plats of
property in connection therewith, shall give due notice in
advance to the adjoining owners.
- Surveyors shall report all objections made by adjoining
property owners, and occupants or claimants
CASE: Republic v. Tuastumban A survey plan standing alone

is not evidence of title.
(3) Submission of tracing cloth plan

CASE: Director of Lands v. Reyes - the Supreme Court declared
that the submission of the tracing cloth plan is a statutory
requirement of mandatory character.
CASE: Titong v.CA - Survey is the act by which the quantity of

a parcel of land is ascertained and also a paper containing a
statement of courses, distances, and the quantity of land. A
survey plan is not an instrument of conveyance; it merely refers
to a delineation of possession.
CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Infante-Tayag the

application for registration was denied because the tracing cloth
plan was not submitted in evidence. It was detached from the
application, then forwarded to, and kept by the Land
Registration Commission, without having been retrieved for
purposes of evidence.
CASE: University of the Philippines v. Rosario

Section 17, PD No. 1529 - requires that the application for
registration must be accompanied by a survey plan of the land
duly approved by the Director of Lands (now Regional Technical
Director, Lands Management Bureau), together with the
applicants muniments of title. No plan or survey may be
admitted in land registration proceedings until approved by the
Director of Lands.
LRA Circular No. 05-2000, March 8, 2000 - requires that what

need be forwarded to the Land Registration Authority is only a
certified copy of the tracing cloth or Diazo polyester film as
approved by the Regional Technical Director. The original of
said plan which is to accompany the application for original
registration shall be filed and retained by the court.
CASE: Republic v. Guinto-Aldana No plan or survey in land

registration may be admitted until approved by the director of
lands.
(4) A certified blue print or white print copy of the plan

suffices for registration purposes
CASE: Republic v. Munoz while the best evidence to identify
a piece of land for registration purposes is the original tracing
cloth, blue print copies could also provide sufficient
identification.
CASE: Angeles v. Samia - Errors in the plans and reproduced

in the certificate of title do not annul the decree of registration
since it is not the plan but the land itself which is registered.
(1) Only the Land Management Bureau may approve a
survey plan for original registration purposes
CASE: Angeles v. Samia
PD No. 239, July 9, 1973 - Only the LMB may verify and approve
survey plans for original registration purposes. The Land
Registration Authority (LRA) has no authority to approve original
survey plans or check the correctness thereof.
CASE: Director of Lands v. Court of Appeals and Iglesia ni Cristo

- the Court considered the submission of a white print copy of
the plan as sufficient to identify the land.
- The fact therefore that the original survey plan was recorded
on white paper instead of a tracing cloth should not detract from
the probative value thereof
(2) Private Surveys/ Duty of Surveyors

CASE: Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court and
Espartinez - the requirement of presentation of the racing cloth
plan required x x x may now be dispensed with where there is a
survey plan the correctness of which
had not been overcome by clear, strong and convincing
evidence.
2 things paramount to possession:

a. There must be occupancy, apprehension, or taking;
b. There must be intent to possess.
CASE: Repubic v. Espinosa When a blueprint may be

admitted as evidence of identity and location of subject property
for registration:
a. It was duly executed by a licensed geodetic engineer;
b. It proceeded officially from the land management
services of the DENR; and
c. It is accompanied by a technical description of the
property which is certified as correct by the geodetic
surveyor who conducted the survey and the Land
management Services of the DENR.
Without occupancy, there is no possession.
CASE: Cuaycong v. Benedicto - Possession, to constitute the

foundation of a prescriptive right, must be possession under a
claim of title or it must be adverse.
CASE: Ordoez v. Court of Appeals - Acts of a possessory
character performed by one who holds the property by mere
tolerance of the owner are clearly not in the concept of an
owner, and such possessory acts, no matter how long
continued, do not start the period of prescription running.
CASE: Alvarez v. PICOP Resources
Claim of Ownership is the possession of a piece of property
with the intention of claiming it I hostility to the true owner. It is
also defined as a partys manifest intention to take over land,
regardless of title or right.
(5) What defines a piece of land is not the area but the
boundaries thereof.
CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Santos - what defines
a piece of titled property is not the numerical data ndicated as
the area of the land, calculated with more or less certainty
mentioned in the technical description, but the boundaries or
metes and bounds of the property as enclosing it and showing
its limits.
CASE: Mistica v. Republic Possession alone is not sufficient

to acquire title to alienable lands of the public domain because
th eland requires possession and occupation.
Conjunction AND shows that the clear intention of the

law tis not to make one synonymous with the other.
Possession is broader that occupation because it

includes constructive possession. When the law adds
occupation, it seeks to delimit the all encompassing
effect of constructive possession.
Actual possession of land consists in the manifestation

of acts of dominion over it of such a nature as a party
would naturally exercise over his own property.
(1) Rule in case of conflict of possession
CASE: Dichoso v. Court of Appeals - in cases of conflict

between areas and boundaries, it is the latter which should
prevail
(6) Natural boundaries must be certain.
CASE: Paterno v. Salud - In identifying a particular piece of
land, its boundaries and not the area are the main factors to be
considered, but this only holds true when the boundaries given
are sufficiently certain and the dentity of the landproved by the
boundaries clearly indicates that an erroneous statement
concerning the area can be disregarded or ignored.
- BUT
CASE: Carabot v. Court of Appeals - When the land sought to
be registered is almost seven times as much as that described
in the deed, the great difference as to area should be properly
explained and the identity of the property should be proven in a
satisfactory manner.
Art. 538, Civil Code - In case of conflict or dispute regarding

possession, the rule of preference is as follows:
a. The present possessor shall be preferred;
b. If there are two possessors, the one longer in
possession;
c. If the dates of the possession are the same, the one
who presents a title; and
d. If both possessors have titles, the court shall determine
the rightful possessor and owner of the land.
(7) Differences of boundaries in tax declarations
CASE: Balbin v. Medalla - A possessory information alone,

without a showing of actual, public and adverse possession of
the land under claim of ownership, for a sufficient period of time,
in accordance with the law, is ineffective as a mode of acquiring
title under Act No. 496. Although converted into a title of
absolute owner-ship,
an informacion posesoria may still be lost by prescription.
CASE: Director of Lands v. Funtilar - differences are not

uncommon as early tax declarations are, more often than not,
based on approximation or estimation rather than on
computation.
- More so, if the land as in this case was merely inherited from a
predecessor and was still held in common.
- Certain discrepancies, if logically explained later, do not make
doubtful, the identification of the property as made, understood
and accepted by the parties to the case.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------4. Law requires both possession and occupation.
CASE: Yu v. Pacleb
Possession The Civil Code states that possession is the
holding of a thing or the enjoyment of a right. To possess means
to actually and physically occupy a thing, with or without a right.
(2) Possession raises a question of fact

CASE: Republic v. Manna Properties, Inc. - The issue of
whether the applicant has presented sufficient proof of the
required possession, under a bona fide claim of ownership,
raises a question of fact.
10
The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. Matters of

proof and evidence are beyond its power under Rule

45 of the Rules of Court, except in the presence of
some meritorious circumstances.
by themselves conclusive proof of their alleged possession

under claim of ownership.
The Court further observed: That Only 3,000 coconut

trees were planted, could only mean that about only 25
hectares out of the 138 hectares claimed by herein
respondent applicants were cleared, cultivated and
planted to coconut trees and fruit trees. Once planted,
a coconut is left to grow and need not be tended or
watched. This is not what the law considers as
possession under claim of ownership. On the contrary,
it merely showed casual or occasional cultivation of
portions of the land in question.
In short, possession is not exclusive nor notorious,
much less continuous, so as to give rise to a
presumptive grant from the government.
This is a clear case of land-grabbing of over 100
hectares of land
CASE: Tysons Super Concrete, Inc. v. Court of Appeals - The

recognized exceptions to the (above rule) are:
a. when the findings are grounded entirely on
speculation, surmises or conjectures;
b. when the inference made is manifestly mistaken,
absurd or impossible;
c. when there is grave abuse of discretion;
d. when the judgment is based on a misapprehension of
facts.
e. when the findings of facts are conflicting;
f. when in making its findings, the Court of Appeals went
beyond the issues of the case, or its findings are
contrary to the admissions of both the appellant and
the appellee;
g. when the findings are contrary to the trial court;
h. when the findings are conclusions without citation of
specific evidence on which they are based;
i. when the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the
petitioners main and reply briefs are not disputed by
the respondent;
j. when the findings of fact are premised on the supposed
absence of evidence and contradicted by the evidence
on
k. record; and
l. when the Court of Appeals manifestly overlooked
certain relevant facts not disputed by the parties, which
if properly considered, would justify a different
conclusion.
(5) Tenuous,
possession
unreliable
and
hearsay
evidence
of
CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Miguel - The Court

found the evidence of the applicant tenuous, unreliable and
hearsay and declared the land part of the public domain.
- the property was densely forested and sparsely cultivated, with
the coconut trees barely 5 to 8 years old, negating the claim of
possession dating back to the Spanish era.
CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Chavez - The private
respondent showed that he had been paying taxes on the land
only from 1972 and up to 1977. There was no showing of tax
payments made on the same land before 1972 by his
predecessors-in-interest although they are supposed to have
been in possession thereof since time immemorial.
if it is true that his predecessors-in-interest were in

possession since time immemorial, why had they not
themselves introduced any improvement on the land?
(3) Mere casual cultivation is not possession under claim of

ownership
CASE: Republic v. Vera - A mere casual cultivation of portions
of the land by the claimant does not constitute possession under
claim of ownership.
(6) Possession arising from a tax delinquency sale

CASE: Director of Lands v. Reyes - mere casual cultivation of
portions of the land and the raising thereon of cattle do not
constitute possession under claim of ownership. While grazing
livestock over land is of course to be considered with other acts
of dominion to show possession, the mere occupancy of land by
grazing livestock upon it, without substantial enclosures or other
permanent improvements, is not sufficient to support a claim of
title thru acquisitive prescription.
CASE: Director of Lands v. Funtilar - the Court upheld

respondents claim of possession, on the basis of a tax
delinquency sale of the property.
The fact of possession is bolstered by the forfeiture in

1940 of the land in favor of the government. It would be
rather absurd under the circumstances of this case to
rule that the government would order the forfeiture of
property for nonpayment of real estate taxes if the
property is forest land.
CASE: Sandoval v. Insular Government - The law does not

require that the entire land be cultivated, but that it be in open,
continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession under a bona
fide claim of ownership for the required period.
(4) Evidence on overt acts of possession
Overt acts of possession may consist in introducing

valuable improvements on the property, like fruitbearing 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.
(7) Commencement of possession

CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Naguit - the law merely
requires that the property sought to be registered is already
classified as alienable and disposable at the time the application
for registration of title is filed.
CASE: Republic v. Intermediate Appellate Court and Leyco, The tax declarations presented as evidence are not
11
The enactment of the Property Registration Decree

and the amendatory PD No. 1073 does not preclude
the application for registration of alienable lands of the
public domain, possession over which commenced
only after June 12, 1945, considering Section 14(2) of
the Decree which authorizes the application of those

who have acquired ownership of private lands by
prescription under the provisions of existing laws.
Required bona fide possession thereof starts to

becounted only from the time such lands are:
a. reclassified as fit for agricultural purposes and,
thereafter,
b. released for disposition as A and D for the entire period
required by law for confirmation of title, which means
since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
5. Tax declarations; tax receipts.
months prior to the filing of the application, which is rather

irregular for a person claiming to be the legitimate owner of the
property. Moreover, the witness who testified on the supposed
possession of the applicant does not even know the boundary
owners and the area of the land.
CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Naguit - 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.
CASE: Republic v. Intermediate Appellate Court and Leyco

Application for registration approved by the lower court was set
aside on the basis of the following observations:
a. anomaly in the listing of adjoining owners in the two
aforestated tax declarations over the same parcel of
land only reveals the flaw that apparently attended the
acquisition of the lots in question
b. disparity in the size of the land in the 2 tax declarationsa clear indication that respondent applicants herein
and their predecessor-in-interest were uncertain and
contradictory as to the exact size of the land they
purportedly possessed.
c. 6 years after Tax Declaration No. 476 was filed, Tax
Declaration No. 2779 was filed cancelling Tax
Declaration No. 476 showing a questionable
increase in the applicants landholdings in so short a
span of time
d. of the total declared area of 119.1231 hectares, only
about 19.1231 hectares were planted to coconuts and
the remaining 100.0000 hectares were cogonal or
uncultivated lands.
e. the taxes due on the litigated lots were not paid
regularly.
CASE: Angat v. Republic - Little probative value was given by

the court to the real property taxes paid from 1989 to 1998 since
there is no showing that the real property taxes were paid by
himor his alleged predecessors-in-interest prior to 1989.
CASE: Republic v. Alconaba - The voluntary declaration of a

piece of property for taxation purposes manifests not only ones
sincere and honest desire to obtain title to the property and
announces his adverse claim against the State and all other
interested parties, but also the intention to contribute needed
revenues to the government. Such an act strengthens ones
bona fide claim of acquisition of ownership.
CASE: Llanes v. Republic - Tax declarations and tax receipts
when coupled with actual possession constitute evidence of
great weight and can be the basis of a claim of ownership
through prescription.
CASE: Valdez- Tallorin v. Tarona - A tax declaration is a telling
evidence declarant's possession which could ripen to
ownership.
The unjustifiable award of this vast tract of land

which are cogon lands and therefore pasture lands
still forming part of the public domain and released by the
Bureau of Lands for disposition to the respondent, applicants
herein, who are undeserving, is tantamount to putting a premium
on absentee landlordism.
CASE: Elumbaring v. Elumbaring, - receipts and declarations

constitute some proof showing the good faith on the part of the
person occupying and restraining possession of the property.
BUT
CASE: Republic v. Tuastumban A tax declaration and real
property tax clearance, standing alone, merely prove payment
of realty taxes.
CASE: Republic v. Manna Properties - Section 48(b) of CA No.

141 and Section 14(1) of PD No. 1529 specifically require
possession since June 12, 1945 or prior thereto. A tax
declaration issued in 1945 may have been issued in December
1945. Unless the date and month of issuance in 1945 is stated,
compliance with the reckoning date in CA No. 141 cannot be
established.
(1) Failure to pay taxes does not alone constitute

abandonment of property
CASE: Casimiro v. Fernandez - the plaintiff would not lose his
property either because he failed to pay his taxes or because
the party from whom he bought it continued by mistake to pay
them.
CASE: Reyes v. Sierra Mere failure of the owner to pay the
taxes does not warrant a conclusion that there was
abandonment of a right to the property. The payment of taxes
on property does not alone constitute sufficient evidence of title.
Section 28. Partial judgment. In a case where only a portion

of the land subject of registration is contested, the court may
render partial judgment provided that a subdivision plan
showing the contested and uncontested portions approved
by the Director of Lands is previously submitted to said court.
(2) Irregular payment of taxes; discrepancy in area and

boundary owners
Section 29. Judgment confirming title. All conflicting claims

of ownership and interest in the land subject of the application
shall be determined by the court. If the court, after
considering the evidence and the reports of the
Commissioner of Land Registration and the Director of
Lands, finds that the applicant or the oppositor has sufficient
CASE: Republic v. Court of Appeals and Infante-Tayag- the

Court
declared that the applicant failed to satisfy the
requirements for judicial confirmation of her alleged title. The
taxes for 31 years, 1946 to 1976, were paid only in 1976, a few
12

- Judgment rendered in land registration case becomes final
upon the expiration of 15 days, no longer 30 days. (Sec. 39, BP
blg.129)
- Upon the finality of the judgment, it devolves upon the land
registration court to issue an order for the issuance of a decree,
and the Land Registration Authority, pursuant to said order, to
issue the corresponding decree of registration to the person
entitled thereto.
- after ownership has been proved and confirmed by judicial
declaration, no further proceeding to enforce the judgment in
necessary, EXCEPT when the adverse or losing party had been
in possession of the land and the winning party desires to oust
him therefrom.
title proper for registration, judgment shall be rendered

confirming the title of the applicant, or the oppositor, to the
land or portions thereof..
1. Court has broad jurisdiction over all issues.
- The court is now authorized to hear and decide not only noncontroversial cases but even contentious issues which used to
be beyond its competence.
2. Reports of LRA Administrator and Director of Lands.
- Section 29 mandates the LRA Administrator and the Director
of Lands to submit to the court all necessary and relevant
evidence as well as reports to aid the court in the determination
of the case.
-The reports may include:
1. Information about the status of the land applied for,
2. Its present classification, and
3. Whether or not the same had been previously decreed as
private property or patented under the provisions of the Public
Land Act.
2. Court retains jurisdiction until after final entry of decree.

- Gomez v. Court of Appeals:
Unlike ordinary civil actions, the adjudication of land in a
cadastral or land registration proceeding does not become final,
in the sense of incontrovertibility until after the expiration of one
(1) year after the entry of the final decree of registration. This
Court, in several decisions, has held that as long as a final
decree has not been entered by the Land Registration Commission (now LRA) and the period of one (1) year has not
elapsed from date of entry of such decree, the title is not finally
adjudicated and the decision in the registration proceeding
continues to be under the control and sound discretion of the
court rendering it.
- Before the lapse of 1 year, the decision may, upon notice and
hearing, be still set aside and the land adjudicated to another
with better right.
3. Only Judgements and Processes received by the

Solicitor General bind the Government.
- The belated filing of an appeal by the State, or even its failure
to file an opposition, in a land registration case because of the
mistake or error on the part of its officials or agents does not
deprive the government of its right to appeal from judgment of
the court.
4. Principle of res judicata applicable to registration
proceedings.
- The requisites of res judicata are:
(1) the former judgment must be final;
(2) it must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction of
the subject matter and the parties;
(3) it must be a judgment on the merits; and
(4) there must be, between the first and second actions, (a)
identity of parties
(b) identity of subject matter and
(c) identity of cause of action.
- But a judgment dismissing an application for registration of land
does not constitute res judicata, and the unsuccessful applicant,
or any person deriving title from him, may file another
proceeding for the registration of the same land.
3. Judgment once final cannot be amended to modify

decree.
- A decree entered upon facts which are not true is not itself
erroneous. It is a perfectly correct decree according to the
evidence in the case.
- A decree which is at variance with the evidence presented to
support that decree is an erroneous decree and, within certain
limitations, may be corrected to conform to the evidence.
- After the land has been registered, the registration court
ceases to have jurisdiction over it for any purpose and it returns
to the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts of law for all subsequent
purposes. (eg. location of division lines, an action in personam)
4. Writ of possession
- A writ of possession is employed to enforce a judgment to
recover the possession of land. It commands the sheriff to enter
the land and give possession of it to the person entitled under
the judgment.
-Cases where a writ of possession may be issued:
(1) in a land registration proceeding, which is a proceeding in
rem;
(2) in an extra-judicial foreclosure of a realty mortgage;
(3) in a judicial foreclosure of mortgage, a quasi in rem
proceeding, provided that the mortgagor is in possession of the
mortgaged realty and no third person, not a party to the
foreclosure suit, had intervened; and
(4) in execution sales. (Serra v. CA)
SEC. 30. When judgment becomes final; duty to cause

issuance of decree. The judgment rendered in a land
registration proceedings becomes final upon the expiration of
thirty days (now fifteen days) to be counted from the date of
receipt of notice of the judgment. An appeal may be taken
from the judgment of the court as in ordinary civil cases. After
judgment has become final and executory, it shall
devolve upon the court to forthwith issue an order in
accordance with Section 39 of this Decree to the
Administrator for the issuance of the decree of registration
and the corresponding certificate of title in favor of the person
adjudged entitled to registration.
1. Separate proceeding to enforce judgment not necessary
in land registration proceedings.
13

5. Writ of possession in land registration cases
- The judgment confirming the title of the applicant and ordering
its registration in his name necessarily carried with it the delivery
of possession which is an inherent element of the right of
ownership.
- Lucero v. Loot, the Court declared: We have heretofore held
that 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
thereof during the land registration proceedings . . . The
issuance of the decree of registration is part of the registration
proceedings
person adjudged to be entitled thereto, then and only then may

the loser be charged with and punished for contempt.
SEC. 31. Decree of registration. Every decree of
registration issued by the Administrator shall bear the date,
hour and minute of its entry, and shall be signed by him. It
shall state whether the owner is married or unmarried, and if
married, the name of the husband or wife: Provided, however,
That if the land adjudicated by the court is conjugal property,
the decree shall be issued in the name of both spouses. If the
owner is under disability, it shall state the nature of disability,
and if a minor, his age. It shall contain a description of the
land as finally determined by the court, and shall set forth the
estate of the owner, and also, in such manner as to show their
relative priorities, all particular estates, mortgages,
easements, liens, attachments, and other encumbrances,
including rights of tenant-farmers, if any, to which the land or
owners estate is subject, as well as any other matters
properly to be determined in pursuance of this Decree. The
decree of registration shall bind the land and quiet title
thereto, subject only to such exceptions or liens as may be
provided by law. It shall be conclusive upon and against all
persons, including the National Government and all branches
thereof, whether mentioned by name in the application or
notice, the same being included in the general description To
all whom it may concern.
6. Writ of demolition may issue upon a special order of the

court.
- Writ of demolition must, likewise, be issued, without it, writ of
possession would be ineffective.
7. Writ will not issue against persons taking possession
after issuance of final decree.
- A person who took possession of the land AFTER FINAL
ADJUDICATION of the same in registration proceedings cannot
be summarily ousted through a writ of possession secured by a
mere motion and that regardless of any title or lack of title of
persons to hold possession of the land in question, they cannot
be ousted without giving them their day in court in proper
independent proceedings.
- Bernas v. Nuevo:
that when other persons have
SUBSEQUENTLY ENTERED the property, claiming the right of
possession, the owner of the registered property or his
successors in interest cannot dispossess such persons by
merely asking for a writ of possession. The remedy is to resort
to the courts of justice and institute a separate action for unlawful
entry or detainer or for reinvidicatory action, as the case may be.
Only after judgment has been rendered can the prevailing party
secure a writ of possession to enforce his right over the disputed
lot.
- Writ of possession will not issue:
(a) When it has already been issued at the instance of the
applicant or his successors, who hold transfer certificates of title;
and
(b) When the persons against whom it is sought to be used have
occupied the premises after the final decree was issued, and
have not taken direct part as opponents in the registration
proceedings where said final decree was issued.
1. Decree of registration.
- Decree of registration is an order issued under the signature of
the Administrator, Land Registration Authority (LRA), in the
name of the court, stating that the land described therein is
registered in the name of the applicant or oppositor or claimant
as the case may be.
- The decree must be in conformity with the decision of the court
and with the data found in the record, and the Administrator has
no discretion on the matter.
2. Land becomes registered land only upon transcription on
the decree.
- The land becomes a registered land only upon the
TRANSCRIPTION OF THE DECREE in the original registration
book of Register of Deeds and NOT on the date of issuance of
the decree.
3. Registration court has no jurisdiction to decree again
land already decreed in a previous registration case.
- Second decree for the same land would be null and void, since
the principle behind original registration is to register a parcel of
land only once.
8. Writ does not issue in reconstitution cases.

- Reconstitution does not confirm or adjudicate ownership over
the property covered by the reconstituted title (eg. lost or
destroyed certificate) as in original land registration proceedings
where, in the latter, a writ of possession may be issued to place
the applicant-owner in possession.
4. Cadastral courts have limited jurisdiction to correct

technical errors or determine which of several conflicting
titles should prevail.
- Limit: do not impair the substantial rights of the registered
owner, and that such jurisdiction cannot operate to deprive a
registered owner of his title.
9. Consequence of refusal to vacate; contempt.

- If SUBSEQUENT to such dispossession or ejectment the
losing party enters or attempts to enter into or upon the real
property, for the purpose of executing acts of ownership or
possession, or in any manner disturbs the possession of the
5. Decree cannot be issued until after judgment becomes

final.
14

- Innocent purchasers may be misled into purchasing real
properties upon reliance on a judgment which may be reversed
on appeal.
- Torrens title issued on the basis of a judgment that is not final,
the judgment being on appeal, is a nullity, as it is violative of the
explicit provisions of the Property Registration Decree.
5. Reconveyance (Sections 53 and 96)

6. Damages (Section 32)
7. Claim against the Assurance Fund (Section 95)
8. Reversion (Section 101 of CA No. 141)
9. Cancellation of title
10. Annulment of judgment (Rule 47) and
11. Criminal prosecution (Revised Penal Code)
6. Certificate of title becomes indefeasible after one year

from the issuance of the decree.
- General rule: an indirect or collateral attack on a Torrens title
is not allowed
- Exception: where a person obtains a certificate of title to a land
belonging to another and he has full knowledge of the rights of
the true owner. He is then considered as guilty of fraud and he
may be compelled to transfer the land to the defrauded owner
so long as the property has not passed to the hands of an
innocent purchaser for value.
2. New Trial or Reconsideration

- The period for filing is within the period for TAKING, not
perfecting, an appeal.
- An appeal may be taken within fifteen (15) days after notice to
the appellant of the judgment or final order appealed from.
- Where A RECORD ON APPEAL IS REQUIRED, the appellant
shall file a notice of appeal and a record on appeal within thirty
(30) days after notice of the judgment or final order
(1) Grounds
7. The Maysilo Estate Case

- Manotok Realty, Inc. v. CLT Realty Development Corporation:
The court made it plain that the original certificate of title is
issued on the DATE THE DECREE OF REGISTRATION IS
TRANSCRIBED since what stands as the certificate of the title
is the transcript of the decree of registration made by the
Register of Deeds in the registry.
The grounds are:

(a) 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;
(b) 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.
REMEDIES
SEC. 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.
A. Remedies
(2) Contents
- The motion shall be made in writing stating the ground or
grounds therefor, a written notice of which shall be served by the
movant on the adverse party.
- A pro forma motion for new trial or reconsideration shall not toll
the reglementary period of appeal.
- No motion for extension of time to file a motion for new trial or
reconsideration shall be allowed.
(3) Affidavits of Merits
- A motion for new trial grounded on fraud, accident, mistake or
excusable negligence should ordinarily be accompanied by two
affidavits:
1) Setting forth the facts and circumstances alleged to constitute
such fraud, accident, mistake, or execusable negligence; and
2) An affidavit setting forth the particular facts claimed to
constitute the movants meritorious cause of action or defense.
(4) Meaning of fraud, accident, mistake and excusable
negligence
- Fraud to be ground for nullity of a judgment must be
EXTRINSIC to the litigation.
- EXTRINSIC FRAUD refers to any fraudulent act of the
successful party in a litigation which is committed outside the
trial of a case against the defeated party, or his agents, attorneys
or witnesses, whereby said defeated party is prevented from
presenting fully and fairly his side of the case.
- INTRINSIC FRAUD refers to acts of a party in a litigation during
the trial, such as the use of forged instruments or perjured
testimony, which did not affect the presentation of the case, but
did prevent a fair and just determination of the case.
1. Remedies available to the aggrieved party.

- Remedies available: RAN DR2 CRAC
1. New trial or reconsideration (Rule 23, Rules of Court)
2. Relief from judgment (Rule 38)
3. Appeal to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court in the same
manner as in ordinary actions (Section 33 of PD No. 1529)
4. Review of decree (Section 32 of PD No. 1529)
15

- ACCIDENT OR SURPRISE, it must appear that there was
accident or surprise which ordinary prudence could not have
guarded against, and by reason of which the party applying has
probably been impaired in his rights. (eg. illness, lack of notice).
- MISTAKE is some unintentional act, omission, or error arising
from ignorance, surprise, imposition or misplaced confidence. It
may arise either from unconsciousness, ignorance,
forgetfulness, imposition, or misplaced confidence.
- EXCUSABLE NEGLECT means a failure to take the proper
steps at the proper time, not in consequence of the partys own
carelessness, inattention, or willful disregard of the process of
the court, but in consequence of some unexpected or
unavoidable hindrance or accident, or reliance on the care and
vigilance of his counsel or on promises made by the adverse
party.
(2) Period of ordinary appeal

- Within fifteen (15) days from notice of the judgment or final
order appealed from. IF record on appeal is required within thirty
(30) days from notice of the judgment or final order.
- Neypes v. Court of Appeals: in case a motion for new trial or
motion for reconsideration of the decision is filed and the same
is denied, the party litigant is given a fresh period of fifteen (15)
days from receipt of the final order denying his motion within
which to file the notice of appeal.
(3) Perfection of appeal
5. Review of decree of registration
- Eland Philippines, Inc. v. Garcia: The courts may reopen
proceedings already closed by final decision or decree when an
application for review is filed by the party aggrieved within one
(1) year from issuance of the decree of registration. However,
the basis of the aggrieved party must be anchored solely on
actual fraud.
3. Relief from judgment; relief from denial of appeal.

(1) Time for filing petition
- filed within sixty (60) days after the petitioner learns of the
judgment, final order, or other proceeding to be set aside, and
not more than six (6) months after such judgment or final order
was entered, or such proceeding was taken.
(1) Requisites for review

(a) The petitioner must have an estate or interest in the land;
(b) He must show actual fraud in the procurement of the decree
of registration;
(c) The petition must be filed within one year from the issuance
of the decree by the Land Registration Authority; and
(d) The property has not yet passed to an innocent purchaser
for value.
(2)
Petition
for
relief
and
motion
for
new
trial/reconsideration are EXCLUSIVE of each other
- A party who has filed a timely motion for new trial cannot file a
petition for relief after his motion has been denied.
4. Appeal
- An appeal may be taken from a judgment or final order that
completely disposes of the case, or of a particular matter therein
when declared by the Rules of Court to be appealable.
- No appeal may be taken from:
(a) An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration;
(b) An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion
seeking relief from judgment;
(c) An interlocutory order;
(d) An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;
(e) An order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by
consent, confession or compromise on the ground of fraud,
mistake or duress, or any other ground vitiating consent;
(f) An order of execution;
(g) A judgment or final order for or against one or more of several
parties or in separate claims, counterclaims, cross-claims and
third-party complaints, while the main case is pending, unless
the court allows an appeal therefrom; and
(h) An order dismissing an action without prejudice.
(2) Grounds for review; fraud must be actual or extrinsic.

(3) Distinction between extrinsic and intrinsic fraud.
(a) Specific instances of actual or extrinsic fraud
Relief is granted to a party deprived of his interest in land where
the fraud consists in the following acts:
(a) Deliberate misrepresentation that the lots are not contested
when in fact they are;
(b) Applying for and obtaining adjudication and registration in the
name of a co-owner of land which he knows had not been alloted
to him in the partition;
(c) Intentionally concealing facts, and conniving with the land
inspector to include in the survey plan the bed of a navigable
stream;
(d) Willfully misrepresenting that there are no other claims;
(e) Deliberately failing to notify the party entitled to notice;
(f) Inducing a claimant not to oppose the application for
registration;
(g) Misrepresentation by the applicant about the identity of the
lot to the true owner causing the latter to withdraw his opposition.
(h) Failure of the applicant to disclose in her application for
registration the vital facts that her husbands previous
application for a revocable permit and to purchase the lands in
question from the Bureau of Lands had been rejected, because
the lands were already reserved as a site for school purposes;
(i) Deliberate falsehood that the lands were allegedly inherited
by the applicant from her parents, which misled the Bureau of
Lands into not filling the opposition and thus effectively depriving
the Republic of its day in court.
(1) Modes of appeal

(a) Ordinary appeal. The appeal to the Court of Appeals in
cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its
ORIGINAL jurisdiction.
(b) Petition for review. The appeal to the Court of Appeals in
cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its
APPELLATE jurisdiction
(c) Appeal by certiorari. In all cases where only questions of
law are raised or involved, the appeal shall be to the Supreme
Court by petition for review on certiorari.
16

(a) The action must be brought in the name of a person
claiming ownership or dominical right over the land
registered in the name of the defendant
(b) The registration of the land in the name of the
defendant was procured through fraud or other illegal
means
(c) The property has not yet passed to an innocent
purchaser for value
(d) The action is filed after the certificate of title had
already become final and incontrovertible but within
four (4) years from the discovery of the fraud, or not
later than 10 years in the case of an implied trust
(b) When relief may not be granted

(a) Alleged fraud goes into the merits of the case, is intrinsic and
not collateral, and has been controverted and decided;
(b) Where it appears that the fraud consisted in the presentation
at the trial of a supposed forged document, or a false and
perjured testimony; or in basing the judgment on a fraudulent
compromise agreement, or in the alleged fraudulent acts or
omission of the counsel which prevented the petitioner from
properly presenting the case.
(5) Petition must be filed within one year from entry of
decree of registration
- it has been ruled that the petition may be filed at any time after
the rendition of the courts decision and before the expiration of
one year from the entry of the final decree of registration for, as
noted in Rivera v. Moran, there can be no possible reason for
requiring the complaining party to wait until the final decree is
entered before urging his claim of fraud.
- Petition for a review under Section 32 is a remedy separate
and distinct from a motion for a new trial and the right to the
remedy is not affected by the denial of such a motion
irrespective of the grounds upon which it may have been
presented.
- Where a petition for review of a decree of registration is filed
within the one-year period from entry of the decree, it is error for
the court to deny the petition without hearing the evidence in
support of the allegation of actual and extrinsic fraud upon which
the petition is predicated. The petitioner should be afforded an
opportunity to prove such allegation.
(4) Remedy available even before issuance of decree

(5) Relevant allegations
- Article 434 of the Civil Code; Successful recovery of ownership;
2 things to prove:
1) Identity of the land claimed; and
2) His title thereto.
(6) Reconveyance is an action in personam
(7) Where to file action
- Sec 19(2) BP 129 as amended by RA 7691, Regional Trial
Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions
which involve the title to or any interest in property where the
assessed value thereof exceeds P20,000.00, or in Metropolitan
Manila, where such value exceeds P50,000.00.
(8) Indispensable parties to be impleaded in an action for
conveyance
- An indispensable party is one without whom the action cannot
be finally determined, whose interests in the subject matter of
the suit and in the relief sought are so bound up with that of the
other parties that his legal presence as a party to the proceeding
is an absolute necessity.
(6) Date of issuance of patent is equivalent to the decree of

registration.
-The rule of incontrovertibility and indefeasibility of Torrens title
after one year from entry of the decree of registration is equally
applicable to titles acquired through homestead or free patents.
6. Reconveyance, generally
- An ACTION FOR RECONVEYANCE is a legal and equitable
remedy granted to the rightful owner of land which has been
wrongfully or erroneously registered in the name of another for
the purpose of compelling the latter to transfer or reconvey the
land to him.
- Available also to person with a better right.
- After one year from the date of the decree, the sole remedy of
the landowner whose property has been lawfully or erroneously
registered in anothers name is NOT to set aside the decree,
BUT, respecting the decree as incontrovertible and no longer
open to review, to bring an ordinary action in ordinary court of
justice for RECONVEYANCE or, if the property has passed into
the hands of an innocent purchaser for value, FOR DAMAGES.
(9) Quantum of proof

- Clear and convincing evidence that the land sought to be
reconveyed is his.
(10) Action for reconveyance may be barred by prescription
1. Action based on fraud, ten years
- DBT Mar-bay Construction, Inc. v. Panes; when an action for
reconveyance is based on fraud, it must be filed within four years
from discovery of the fraud. Such discovery is deemed to have
taken place from the issuance of the original certificate of title.
2. Action based on implied trust, ten years
- Prescriptive period applies only when plaintiff is not in
possession. If in possession, imprescriptible, action proper is
quieting to title.
(1) Statutory basis of an action for reconveyance

(2) Nature and purpose of an action for reconveyance
(3) Requisites:
To warrant a reconveyance of the land, the following requisites
must concur:
3. Action based on a void contract, imprescriptible

4. Action where plaintiff is in possession imprescriptible
- Action to quiet title; requisites:
17

1) The plaintiff or complainant has a legal or an equitable title to
or interest in the real property subject of the action; and
2) The deed, claim, encumbrance or proceeding claimed to be
casting a cloud on his title must be shown to be in fact invalid or
inoperative despite its prima facie appearance of validity or legal
efficacy.
- Trust; Period of prescription may start, it must show:
(a) The trustee has performed unequivocal acts of repudiation
amounting to an ouster of the cestui que trust,
(b) Such positive acts of repudiation have been made known to
the cestui que trust, and,
(c) The evidence thereon is clear and positive.
shown by extrinsic proof to be invalid or inapplicable to the

estate in question.
*if the person claiming to be the owner is in actual possession
of the property, the right to seek reconveyance, which in effect
seeks to quiet title does not prescribe
Action to quiet title, when proper
a. A person whose purchase of land is evidenced only
by a private instrument
b. despite the fact that the title had been transferred to
them by the execution of the deed of sale and the
delivery of the object of the contract, the petitioners
adamantly refused to accept the tender of payment
c. When one is disturbed in any form in his rights over
an immovable by unfounded claims of others
*The right of reversion or reconveyance to the State of Public

properties fraudulently registered and which are not capable of
private appropriation or private acquisition does not prescribe
11. Laches may bar recovery
The equitable defense of laches requires four elements:
(1) conduct on the part of the defendant, or of one under
whom her of one under whom he claims, giving rise to the
situation of which complaint is made and for which the
complaint seeks a remedy;
(2) delay in asserting the complainants rights, the complainant
having had knowledge or notice, of the defendants conduct
and having been afforded an opportunity to institute a suit;
(3) lack of knowledge or notice on the part of the defendant
that the complainant would assert the right on which he bases
his suit; and
(4) injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is
accorded to the complainant, or the suit is not held to be
barred.
*The principle of laches which, in effect, is one of estoppel
because it prevents people who have slept on their rights from
prejudicing the rights of third parties who have placed reliance
on the inaction of the original patentee and his successors in
interest,
12. Action may be barred by res judicata
Well-settled is the rule that when a court of competent
jurisdiction has tried and decided a right or fact, so long as the
decision remains unreversed, it is conclusive on the parties
and those in privity with them.
*the real party in interest is the person claiming title or

ownership adverse to that of the registered owner
Trust
Trust is the legal relationship between one person having an
equitable ownership in property and another person owning the
legal title to such property, the equitable ownership of the
former entitling him to the performance of certain duties and
the exercise of certain powers by the latter.
Express trust - created by the direct and positive acts of the
parties by some writing or deed or will or by words evidencing
an intention to create a trust.
Implied trusts - are those which, without being expressed, are
deducible from the nature of the transaction as matters of
intent or which are superinduced on the transaction by
operation of law as matters of equity, independently of the
particular intention of the parties.
a. Resulting trusts - they arise from the nature or
circumstances of the consideration involved in a
transaction whereby one person thereby
becomes invested with legal title but is obligated
in equity to hold his legal title for the benefit of
another.
b. Constructive trusts - They arise contrary to
intention against one who, by fraud, duress or
abuse of confidence, obtains or holds the legal
right to property which he ought not, in equity and
good conscience, to hold.
This is in accordance with the doctrine of res judicata which

has the following elements:
(2) the court which rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject
matter and the parties;
(3) the judgment must be on the merits; and
(4) there must be between the first and the second actions,
identity of parties, subject matter and causes of action.
1. Prescription arising from implied or constructive Trust

GEN. RULE: The rule that a trustee cannot acquire by
prescription ownership over property entrusted to him until and
unless he repudiates the trust, applies to express trusts and
resulting implied trusts.
EXCEPTION: in constructive implied trusts, prescription may
supervene even if the trustee does not repudiate the
relationship
QUIETING OF TITLE
Quieting of title is a common law remedy for the removal of any
cloud, doubt or uncertainty affecting title to the property.
The prescriptive period for the action to reconvey the title to

real property arising from an implied or constructive trust:
A cloud on title is an outstanding claim or encumbrance

which, if valid, would affect or impair the title of the owner of a
particular estate, and on its face has that effect, but can be
18

-
10 (ten) years counted from the date of the issuance

of the certificate of title over the real property.
Reversion
Expressly authorized by
public land act
ACTION FOR DAMAGES

An action for reconveyance is not feasible where the property
has already passed into the hands of an innocent purchaser for
value. But the interested party is not without a remedy he
can file an action for damages against the persons
responsible for depriving him of his right or interest in the
property.
Escheat
May be instituted when
there is violation of
constitution which
prohibits transfer of
agricultural lands to
aliens
GEN. RULE: State not barred by res judicata or estoppel
the indefeasibility of a title over land previously public

is not a bar to an investigation by the Director of
Lands as to how such title has been acquired, if the
purpose of such investigation is to determine whether
or not fraud had been committed in securing such title
in order that the appropriate action for reversion may
be filed by the government.
An action for damages should be brought within ten years

from the date of the issuance of the questioned certificate of
title pursuant to Article 1144 of the Civil Code.
ACTION FOR REVERSION
Reversion - connotes restoration of public land fraudulently

awarded or disposed of to the mass of the public domain and
may again be the subject of disposition in the manner
prescribed by law to qualified applicants.
But even granting that the said official was negligent,

the doctrine of estoppel cannot operate against the
State. It is a wellsettled rule in our jurisdiction that the
Republic or its government is usually not estopped by
the mistake or error on the part of its officials or
agents.
*only the Solicitor General may file an action for reversion

EXCEPTION:
Doctrine on equitable estoppel
Estoppel by Laches
CANCELLATION OF TITLE
an action for cancellation is initiated by a private property
usually in a case where there are two titles issued to different
persons for the same lot.
The hoary principle in this jurisdiction is that
where two certificates of title are issued to different persons
covering the same land in whole or in part:
the earlier in date must prevail as between the original parties
in case of successive registration where more than one
certificate is issued over the land:
the person holding under the prior certificate is entitled to the
land as against the person who relies on the second certificate.
RECOVERY OF DAMAGES FROM THE ASSURANCE FUND
SEC. 95. Action for compensation from funds.
A person who, without negligence on his part,
sustains loss or damage, or is deprived of land or any
estate or interest therein in consequence of the
bringing of the land under the operation of the Torrens
system of arising after original registration of land,
through fraud or in consequence of any error,
omission, mistake or misdescription in any certificate
of title or in any entry or memorandum in the
registration book, and who by the provisions of this
Decree is barred or otherwise precluded under the
provision of any law from bringing an action for the
recovery of such land or the estate or interest therein,
may bring an action in any court of competent
jurisdiction for the recovery of damages to be paid out
of the Assurance Fund.
Grounds for reversion:

a. Alienations of land acquired under free patent or
homestead provisions in violation of section 118, CA.
No 141
b. Conveyances made by non-Christians in violation of
section 120, CA no. 141
SEC. 120. Conveyances and
encumbrances made by persons belonging
to the so-called non-Christian tribes, when
proper, shall be valid if the person making
the conveyance or encumbrance is able to
read and can understand the language in
which the instrument of conveyance or
encumbrance is written. Conveyances and
encumbrances made by illiterate nonChristians or literate non- Christians where
the instrument of conveyance or
encumbrance is in a language not
understood by the said literate nonChristians shall not be valid unless duly
approved by the Chairman of the
Commission on National Integration. (As
amended by RA No. 3872, approved June
18, 1964)
c.
Alienations of land acquired under CA No. 141 in

favour of other persons not qualified under Sections
121, 122, 123 of CA No. 141
Other grounds (based on my notes during the recitations, use

at your own risk):
No other occupants/claimants
Non-registrable land at the time it was registered
Assurance Fund is intended to relieve innocent persons from

the harshness of the doctrine that a certificate is conclusive
evidence of an indefeasible title to land
Reversion Vs. Escheat Proceeding
19

Requisites for recovery:
1. that a person sustains loss or damage,
a. without negligence on his part, and
b. through fraud, error, omission, mistake or
misdescription in any certificate of title or in any entry or
memorandum in the registration book
2. or is deprived of any estate or interest in land
required of applicants in cadastral proceedings, or application

for public land patent.
INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE
A purchaser in good faith and for value 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.
a.
b.
without negligence on his part

on account of the bringing of land under the operation
of the Torrens system arising after original registration
c. is barred or precluded from bringing an action for the
recovery of such land or estate or interest therein.
* An action for compensation against the Assurance Fund must
be brought within a period of six (6) years from the time the
right to bring such action first occurred
* person who brings the action must be the registered owner
and, as the holders of TCT, that they be innocent purchasers in
good faith and for value
* To afford relief from the Assurance Fund, the plaintiff must
have sustained loss or damage or deprived of any estate or
interest in the land.
*breach of trust is not a ground for a claim against the
Assurance Fund
*Good faith requires that the person who claims damages
should not have been negligent in acquiring the property or in
obtaining the registration thereof in his name
ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS AND
RESOLUTIONS
Action for annulment of judgment is a remedy in law
independent of the case where the judgment sought to be
annulled was rendered
*it as an equitable and extra-ordinary remedy: allowed only in
exceptional cases where the ordinary remedies of new trial,
appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no
longer available without the fault of the petitioner.
GROUNDS:
1. extrinsic fraud
when there is a fraudulent act committed by the
prevailing party outside the trial of the case, whereby
the defeated party was prevented from presenting
fully his side of the case by fraud or deception
practiced on him by the prevailing party
Extrinsic fraud shall not be a valid ground if it was
availed of, or could have been availed of, in a motion
for new trial or petition for relief.
Must be filed: within four (4) years from discovery
While good faith is presumed, conversely, bad faith must be

established by competent proof by the party alleging the same.
* Purchaser is not required to explore further than what the
title indicates for hidden defects; he is charged only of such
burdens and claims which are annotated on the title, for the
registration is an operative act that binds the property
Except when he has knowledge 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.
* One who purchases real estate with knowledge of a defect or

lack of title in his vendor cannot claim that he has acquired title
thereto in good faith as against the true owner of the land or of
an interest therein;
* As between two persons both of whom are in good faith and
both innocent of any negligence, the law must protect and
prefer the lawful holder of registered title over the transferee of
a vendor bereft of any transmissible rights.
Purchaser charged only with notice of liens noted
on the title
* 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
2.
-
lack of jurisdiction.
If the ground for annulment is lack of jurisdiction,
another remedy is certiorari under Rule 65, in which
case, the Court of Appeals does not have exclusive
jurisdiction since the Supreme Court also has such
jurisdiction
Must be filed: before barred by laches or estoppel
CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
* The State may criminally prosecute for perjury the party who
obtains registration through fraud, such as by stating false
assertions in the application for registration, sworn answer
Rule of caveat emptor

caveat emptor - requires the purchaser to be aware of the
supposed title of the vendor and one who buys without
checking the vendors title takes all the risks and losses
consequent to such failure
* 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
20

h)
of possession of the occupants, i.e., whether or not the

occupants possess the land en concepto de dueo, in concept
of owner
i)
Prior registration of a lien
Registration is not an operative act for a mortgage to be
binding between the parties. But to third persons, it is
indispensable.
j)
* prior registration creates a preference; subsequent

registration will not diminish this preference which retroacts to
the date of the annotation of the notice of lis pendens and the
adverse claim. Thus, failure to register will not bind third parties
said findings of fact are conclusions without

citation of specific evidence on which they are
based;
the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the
petitioners main and reply briefs are not disputed by
the respondents; and
the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are
premised on the supposed absence of evidence and
contradicted by the evidence on record.
(11) Burden of proof

Burden of proving the status of a purchaser in good faith
lies upon one who asserts that status
cannot be discharged by mere invocation of the legal

presumption of good faith
Rule of good faith equally applies to mortgagees of real

property
* when a mortgagee relies upon what appears on the face of a
Torrens title and lends money in all good faith on the basis of
the title in the name of the mortgagor, only thereafter to learn
that the latters title was defective, his or her right or lien upon
the land mortgaged must be respected and protected for being
an innocent mortgagee for value.
(12) Rule on double sale of property

Read: Article 1544 of the Civil Code
TO APPLY:
Single vendor sold the same immovable property

to two or more buyers.
Conveyance must have been made by a party who

has an existing right in the thing and the power to
dispose of it.
TWO (or more) BUYERS, SAME IMMOVABLE property,
SINGLE vendor
Banks are expected to exercise greater care and prudence

in their dellings
* 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.
(10) Good faith is a question of fact
Whether or not a person is a purchaser in good faith
Factual matter
Question of fact
Question of law
doubt or difference arises
doubt or controversy as to
as to
what the law is on a certain
the truth or the falsity of the
state of facts.
statement of facts
1.
If Registered under the Torrens system, ownership

priority given to:
a. first registrant in good faith;
b. first possessor in good faith; and
c. buyer who in good faith presents the oldest
title.
2.
If Not registered under the Torrens system

a. Article 1544 does not apply
Other instances when Article 1544 of the Civil Code is NOT
APPLICABLE:
a) Where there is only one valid sale, the previous sale
being fraudulent;
b) Where one deed of sale was registered ahead of
the other, but such is found to be a forgery;
c) Where one party derive their right through inheritance
or sale from a particular person (ex. Person A), while
the other party invoke their right through the sale from
a different person (Person B).
d) Where two different contracts of sale are made by two
different persons, one of them not being the owner
of the property sold.
RULE: Where two certificates purport to include same land,
the earlier date prevails.
VALID ONLY: Absent any irregularity in the process
of registration.
General Rule:
Factual findings of the Court of Appeals are binding and
conclusive upon the Supreme Court.
Exceptions:
a) the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on
speculation, surmise and conjecture;
b) the inference made is manifestly mistaken;
c) there is grave abuse of discretion;
d) the judgment is based on a misapprehension of
facts;
e) the findings of fact are conflicting;
f) the Court of Appeals went beyond the issues of the
case and its findings are contrary to the admissions
of both appellant and appellees;
g) the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are
contrary to those of the trial court;
(13) Principle of prior est temporae, prior est in

jura
HE WHO IS FIRST IN TIME IS PREFERRED IN RIGHT
21

Final judgment or order
One that finally disposes of a case, leaving nothing

more for the court to do with respect to it;
an adjudication on the merits declares categorically

what the rights and obligations of the parties are; or
an order or judgment that dismisses an action.
Applicable - when not all the requisites are present

for the application of Article 1544.
Only essential requisite - Priority in time;

o The only one who can invoke this is the first
vendee.
o FIRST VENDEE - purchaser in good faith
because at the time he bought the real
property, there was still no sale to a second
vendee.
Has greater significance in case of double sale of

immovable property.
One who acquires it and first records it in the Registry

of Property, both made in good faith, shall be
deemed the owner.
o GOOD FAITH 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.
General Rule: Knowledge by the first buyer of the second
sale cannot defeat the first buyers rights.
Exception: When the second buyer first registers in good
faith the second sale.
BUT: Knowledge gained by the second buyer of the first sale
defeats his rights even if he is first to register, since such
knowledge taints his registration with bad faith.
3.
4. Appeal period standardized.

Motion for reconsideration is filed and denied,
Party litigant has a fresh period of fifteen (15) days to

file his notice of appeal or petition
a) from receipt of the order denying the same.
SEC. 33
Modes of appeal to the Court of Appeals or Supreme
Court.
APPEAL may be taken FROM:
a) Judgment or final order that completely disposes of
the case; or
b) A particular matter therein when declared by the
Rules of Court to be appealable.
APPEAL may be BY:
a) Ordinary appeal,
b) Petition for review under Rule 42, or
c) Appeal by certiorari under Rule 45.
1.
2.
Period to file petition for review on certiorari.
To the Supreme Court

o within fifteen (15) days from notice of the
judgment or final order or resolution
appealed from, or of the denial of the
petitioners motion for new trial or
reconsideration filed in due time
Verified petition
o Raise only questions of law which must be
distinctly set forth.
On motion duly filed and served, with full payment of

the docket and other lawful fees and the deposit for
costs before the expiration of the reglementary period,
the Supreme Court
o may for justifiable reasons grant an
extension of thirty (30) days only within
which to file the petition.
SEC. 34
1. Applicability of the Rules of Court.
RULES OF COURT
applicable to land registration and cadastral cases

a) by analogy or in a suppletory character and
b) whenever practicable and convenient.
insofar as not inconsistent with the provisions of the

Decree
A REGISTRATION COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION
To decree again the registration of land already

decreed in an earlier land registration case and a
second decree for the same land is null and void.
First decreed owner may file a motion to dismiss said

case.
Period of ordinary appeal.
To the Court of Appeals

o
within fifteen (15) days from notice of the
judgment or final order appealed from.
Where a record on appeal is required

o the appellant shall file a notice of appeal
and a record on appeal within thirty (30)
days from notice of the judgment or final
order.
Period of appeal
o interrupted by a timely motion for new trial
or reconsideration.
No motion for extension of time to file a motion for

new trial or reconsideration shall be allowed.
II. CADASTRAL REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS

A. ORDER FOR SPEEDY SETTLEMENT AND
ADJUDICATION; SURVEY; NOTICES
SEC. 35.
B. PETITION; LOT NUMBERS
SEC. 36.
C. ANSWER
SEC. 37.
D. HEARING; JUDGMENT; DECREE
SEC. 38.
22

1. Nature and purpose of cadastral proceedings.
CADASTRAL SYSTEM
Pursuant to initiative on the part of the

government.
Purpose
o to serve the public interest by requiring that
the titles to any unregistered lands be
settled and adjudicated.
Titles for all the land within a stated area are adjudicated
whether or not the people living within the area desire to have
titles issued.
CADASTRAL CASE
compels all claimants to litigate against one another

regarding their respective claims of ownership.
All private lands in a town are registered in one single

collective proceeding.
Principal aim
o settle as much as possible all disputes over
land and to remove all clouds over land
titles, as far as practicable, in a community.
CADASTRAL COURT
allow all claimants ample freedom to ventilate

whatever right they may assert over real estate,
permitting them to offer proofs in support of their

allegations.
NATURE OF A PROCEEDING
In rem,
promoted by the Director of Lands,
akin to a judicial inquiry and investigation leading to a

judicial decree.
In one sense, there is no plaintiff and there is no

defendant. In another sense, the government is the
plaintiff and all the claimants are defendants.
The usual rules of practice, procedure, and evidence

govern registration proceedings.
i.
published in the Official

Gazette,
ii. posted in the places
indicated, and
iii. sent to the municipal
mayor, barangay captain,
sangguniang panlalawigan
and sangguniang bayan
concerned.
c. Geodetic engineers or other employees
of the Lands Management Bureau
Give advance notice to survey

claimants of the date of the survey
of specific portions of the land, to
be posted in appropriate places.
May enter upon the lands subject of

the survey and
mark the boundaries thereof by the

placing of monuments.
d. Every claimant
indicate to the surveyor the

boundary lines of the property over
which he claims title or interest.
(2) Notice of survey and publication
a. Given by:
Director of Lands
b. Given to:
Persons claiming any interest in the

lands
General public
c. Includes:
Day on which the survey will begin,
Accurate description of the lands to

be surveyed.
d. Published once in the Official Gazette, and
e. Posted in the bulletin board of the
municipality.
f. A copy of the notice shall also be sent to:
Municipal mayor,
barangay captain,
sangguniang panlalawigan and

sangguniang bayan concerned.
(3) Filing of petition for registration
a. Who institutes original registration
proceedings
Director of Lands,
represented by the Solicitor
General
b. How
filing the necessary petition
c. Where
in the Regional Trial Court of
the place where the land is
situated
2.
Procedure leading to the adjudication of property

through cadastral proceedings.
Section 35 of the Property Registration Decree
(1) Cadastral survey preparatory to filing of
petition
a. President
When public interest so requires

that title to any unregistered lands
be settled and adjudicated.
May direct and order the Director of

Lands to cause to be made a
cadastral survey of the lands
involved.
b. Director of Lands
Give notice to persons claiming

any interest in the lands and to the
general public of the day of the
survey,
NOTICE
23

(c) name of the barrio and
municipality in which the lots
are situated;
(d) names and addresses of
the owners of the adjoining lots
so far as known to the
claimant;
(e) if the claimant is in
possession of the lots claimed,
the length of time he has held
such possession and that of his
predecessors, and the manner
in which it has been acquired;
(f) if the claimant is not in
possession or occupation of
the land, the interest claimed
by him and the time and
manner of his acquisition;
(g) the last assessed value of
the lot/lots; and
(h) the encumbrances, if any,
affecting the lots and the
names of adverse claimants,
as far as known.
(6) Hearing of the petition
a. Conducted at
Any convenient place
within the province in which the
lands are situated and
b. Orders for default and confessions
entered,
same manner as in ordinary
land registration proceedings
and
c. governed by the same rules.
(7) Judgment; when title deemed vested
a. Absence of fraud, title to land in a
cadastral proceeding is vested on the
owner,
upon the expiration of the
period to appeal
b. Land becomes registered property
which cannot be lost by adverse
possession.
c. In case of public lands, property is
considered registered
upon the final act or the entry
in the registration book of the
Registry of Deeds had been
accomplished.
d.
Against who
holders, claimants, possessors,
or occupants of such lands or
any part thereof
e. Contain the following:
Stating that public interest
requires that the title to such
lands be settled and
adjudicated and praying that
such titles be so settled and
adjudicated.
Description of the lands,
plan thereof, and
include such other data as to
facilitate notice to all occupants
and persons having a claim or
interest therein.
(4) Publication
a. Provided by:
Section 7 Act No. 22589
Section 35 PD No. 1529
b. For
Registration
Schedule of initial hearing
c. Required
Proceeding is in rem
To give notice to all interested
parties of the claim and the
identity of the property that will
be surveyed
(5) Filing of answer
a. By whom:
Any claimant, whether named
in the notice or not,
b. When:
On or before the date of initial
hearing or within such further
time as may be allowed by the
court.
c. Answer:
shall be signed and sworn to
by the claimant or by some
other authorized person in his
behalf, and
shall state his status, whether
married or unmarried,
his nationality and postal
address.
d. Contain the:
(a) age of the claimant;
(b) cadastral number of the lot
or lots claimed;
3. Actions taken in a cadastral proceeding.

AFTER TRIAL IN A CADASTRAL CASE, THREE ACTIONS
ARE TAKEN.
24

1)
2)
3)
FIRST ACTION
a. adjudicates ownership in favor of one of the
claimants.
b. judgment
SECOND ACTION
a. declaration by the court that the decree is
final
b. the order for the issuance of the certificates
of title by the Administrator of the Land
Registration Authority.
THIRD ACTION
a. devolves upon the Land Registration
Authority
b. to issue decrees of registration pursuant to
final judgments of the courts in land
registration proceedings.
d.
a.
b.
that the courts jurisdiction over the

same subject matter be not split
PROHIBITED IN A CADASTRAL PROCEEDING:
Registration of land, already registered in the name of
a person, in the name of another.
Making of such changes in the title as impairs his
substantial rights.
7.
New titles may be issued for private lands within the

cadastral survey
CADASTRAL SURVEY usually involving a whole
municipality, all lands of whatever nature and classification,
including private lands, are included.
PRIVATE LANDS within the cadastre
NOT anymore be subject to a new hearing and

adjudication by the cadastral court
Remain private lands.
New certificates of title may necessarily be

issued
o Must cover all of the lands contained in
the old ones.
o But no modification or alteration can
be permitted to be made in the Torrens
title for the sole purpose of making the
area of the land described therein agree
with that given in the cadastral survey
plan.
o Must include the whole land specified
in the Torrens title.
Only unregistered lands may be the subject of a

cadastral survey.
CADASTRAL SURVEY
Includes only
any unregistered lands,
Excludes
private lands
4.
5.
Lands already titled cannot be the subject of cadastral

proceedings.
A registration court has no jurisdiction to decree again the
registration of land already decreed in an earlier land
registration case and a second decree for the same land is
null and void.
BECAUSE:
Once decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction,
Title to the land determined is already res judicata,

and
Binding on the whole world, the proceeding being in

rem.
8.
Cadastral answer may not be thrown out upon a mere

motion of adverse claimants
COURT
a. May not / No Jurisdiction
order the cancellation of the claimants answer,

upon motion of adverse claimants
keep the claimant from introducing evidence

to prove his ownership
to decree a lot to one who has put in no claim to

it
to make an award if the claim is uncertain or

refers to an undefined portion of land,
to decree a lot as not contested when it is

contested,
to proceed to adjudication without giving the

opposing parties an opportunity to be heard.
6.
Jurisdiction of the cadastral court over previously

titled lands.
CADASTRAL COURT
a. HAS JURISDICTION:
To determine the priority or relative weight of two

or more certificates of title for the same land.
b. JURISDICTIONS IS LIMITED TO:
necessary correction of technical errors in the

description of the lands,
o provided that such corrections do not impair
the substantial rights of the registered
owner, and
o such jurisdiction does not deprive a
registered owner of his title.
c. JURISDICTION AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE
FINAL DECREE:
o subsists as to all incidental questions
affecting the registered title to the end
9. Amendment of the plan to include additional territory.

General Rule:
An order of a court in a cadastral case amending the official
plan so as to make it include land not previously included
therein is a nullity.
Exception:
When new publication is made.
PUBLICATION is one of the essential bases of the
jurisdiction of the court in land registration and cadastral
25

cases, and additional territory cannot be included by
amendment of the plan without new publication.
Decision of the cadastral court constitutes res judicata in the

following cases:
a) The final judgment in cadastral case is
deemed to have settled the status of the land
subject thereof, and the purported sales if not
noted on the title, like those of the petitioner,
are deemed barred under the principle of res
judicata.
b) The test to determine the existence of res
judicata is simply this: Would the same
evidence support and establish both the present
and the former cause of action? Here, the
answer is in the affirmative. The evidence both in
the cadastral proceedings and in the present
reconveyance case, is directed at the question of
ownership.
c) Claimants did not file their answers in the
cadastral proceedings or failed to
substantiate their claims over the portions they
were then occupying until the cadastral court
declared the lands in question public lands, and
its decision had already become final and
conclusive.
d) The requisites of a plea of res judicata are:
(2) it must have been rendered by a court
having jurisdiction of the subject
matter and the parties;
(3) it must be a judgment on the merits; and
(4) there must be, between the first and
second actions, (a) identity of
parties (b) identity of subject matter
and (c) identity of cause of action.
10. Title to land in a cadastral case is vested upon

expiration of the period to appeal.
In a Cadastral proceeding,
UPON THE PROMULGATION OF THE ORDER ISSUANCE
OF A DECREE
Land has become a registered property
Could not be acquired by adverse possession.

AFTER THE LAPSE OF ONE YEAR
Certificate of title issued, becomes incontrovertible

General rule:
Registration of title under the cadastral system is final,
conclusive and indisputable, after the lapse of the period
allowed for an appeal.
Exception:
Special provision providing for fraud.
UNLIKE
Certificate of title based on a patent
AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF ONE YEAR FROM THE
ISSUANCE THEREOF
Still subject to certain conditions and restrictions
Proper actions may be instituted which may lead to

o cancellation of the patent and the title, and
the
o consequent reversion of the land to the
government.
11. Decision declaring land as public land not a bar to a
subsequent action for confirmation of title over the
same land.
Judicial declaration that a parcel of land is public
NOT the final decree contemplated in Sections 29

and 31 of the Property Registration Decree.
Does not preclude even the same applicant from

subsequently seeking a judicial confirmation of his
title to the same land,
o provided he complies with the provisions of
Section 48 of CA No. 141, as amended, and
o as long as said public land remains alienable
and disposable.
Principle of res judicata
Does not apply
No prior final judgment at all to speak of.
14. Cadastral court has no jurisdiction over a petition for

reconstitution.
RECONSTITUTED TITLE issued in an ordinary civil case,
NOT in a cadastral proceeding.
15.
16. Issuance of writ of possession imprescriptible.
PERSONS WHO ARE
in possession of the lots in question,
unlawfully and adversely,
during the cadastral proceedings,

MAY BE JUDICIALLY EVICTED
by means of a writ of possession,

o issuance of which never prescribes.
12. Neither prescription nor laches may render

inefficacious a decision in a land registration case.
FAILURE on the part of the administrative authorities to do
their part in the issuance of the decree of registration CANNOT
OUST the prevailing party from ownership of the land.
1.
13. Cases where decision of the cadastral court was

considered res judicata.
26
SEC. 39
Issuance of decree of registration and certificate of
title.
i. Upon finality of judgment
ii. Court (within 15 days) issue an order directing LRA
Administrator to issue:

a. Decree of registration
b. Certificate of title
iii.LRA Admin shall prepare:
a. Decree of registration
b. Original certificate of title
i. Signed by him shall be the true
copy of the decree of registration
ii. Precise and correct statement of
the exact status of the fee simple
title
iii. Sent to the ROD of the City or
province where the land lies.
c. Duplicate certificate of title.
i. Sent to the ROD of the City or
province where the land lies.
WHAT APPEARS ON THE FACE OF THE TITLE
is controlling on questions of ownership.

PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY
Presumption that all the requisites for the issuance of

a valid title had been complied with.
Strong presumption
Makes it incontrovertible as against any information

possessoria or any interest in the land existing prior
to the issuance thereof and which is not annotated on
the title.
3. Probative value of a certificate of title.

CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
an indefeasible title to the property

o in favor of the person whose name
appears therein
conclusive as to the identity of the land and also

its location
becomes indefeasible and incontrovertible one

year from its final decree
generally a conclusive evidence of the ownership

of the land referred to therein.
notations or memoranda on the back of the

certificate of title
o not admissible as proof of the contents
of the documents to which they refer, as
they do not form part of the contents of
the decree of registration.
o at most, proof of the existence of the
transactions and judicial orders noted
therein, and a notice to the whole world
of such facts.
Does not create or vest title

o Only confirms or records title already
existing and vested
2.
Decree binds the land and is conclusive against the

whole world.
EVERY DECREE OF REGISTRATION SHALL BEAR
date,
hour and
minute of its entry
signed by the LRA Administrator
state whether the owner is married or unmarried,

o if married, the name of the spouse.
o if the land is conjugal, the decree shall be
issued in the name of both spouses.
If the owner is under disability,

o the nature of the disability, and
if a minor,
o his age
description of the land as finally determined by the

court,
set forth the estate of the owner
all particular estates, mortgages, easements, liens,

attachments, and other encumbrances to which the
land or owners estate is subject.
bind the land and quiet title thereto,

o subject only to such liens as may be
provided by law.
Conclusive upon and against all persons,

o including the national government and all
branches thereof.
CERTIFICATE SHALL TAKE EFFECT
upon the date of the transcription of the decree.

PURPOSE OF THE TORRENS SYSTEM
to quiet title to land and
to stop forever any question as to its legality.
(1) Sanctity of a certificate of title must be preserved;

titleholder should not suffer the negligence or
ineptitude of the States agents
WHERE INNOCENT THIRD PERSONS
relying on the correctness of the certificate of title
acquire rights over the property
their rights cannot be disregarded and cancelled

outright
(2) Validity and correctness of title is presumed
A PERSON DEALING WITH REGISTERED LAND
may safely rely upon the correctness of the certificate

of title issued therefor and
may not be obliged by law to go behind the certificate

o to determine the condition of the property
considered an innocent purchaser for value

AN INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE
one who buys the property of another property of

another,
o without notice that some other person has a
right or interest in such property and
pays the full price for the same,

o at the time of such purchase or
o before he has notice of the claims or interest
of some other person in the property
27

o
Does not become the owner of the land

illegally included (i.e. public highways)
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
Merely an evidence of ownership
Its issuance does not foreclose the possibility that the

real property
o may be co-owned with persons not named in
the certificate or
o may be held in trust for another person by
the registered owner
PRINCIPLE OF INDEFEASIBILTY OF A TORRENS TITLE
does not apply where fraud attended the issuance of

the title
does not furnish a shield for fraud

BUT THE CETIFICATE
cannot be altered, changed modified or dimished

EXCEPT
in a direct proceeding permitted by law.
(3) Title issued pursuant to a public land patent

A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE ISSUED PURSUANT TO A
PUBLIC LAND PATENT (like a homestead or free patent or
emancipation patent pursuant to PD No. 27)
indefeasible as a certificate of title issued pursuant to

judicial registration proceedings,
provided land covered by said certificate is a

disposable public land,
o If the land is not a public land but a
private land, the patent and certificate of
title are a nullity.
becomes indefeasible and incontrovertible upon the

expiration of one year from the date of the issuance
thereof.
(4) Memoranda and encumbrances not admissible as
proof of the contents of the registered documents
(5) Where two or more certificates cover the same
land the earlier in date prevails.
SEC. 40
1. Entry of original certificate of title
ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
The certificate of title issued for the first time after

initial registration proceedings
TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
Any subsequent title issued pursuant to any voluntary

or involuntary instrument affecting the property
covered by the original certificate of title.
General Rule:
Where two certificates of title are issued to different persons
covering the same land in whole or in part,
between the original parties
the earlier in date must prevail

in case of successive registration where more than one
certificate is issued over the land,
the person holding under the prior certificate is

entitled to the land as against the person who relies
on the second certificate.
Exception:
But the rule is not applicable where there is anomaly or
irregularity, a mistake, or faulty or fraudulent registration
tainting the prior title.
(6) Tax declarations cannot defeat conclusiveness of
a certificate of title
Title and certificate of title distinguished.

Title
Certificate of title
Concept of ownership
Evidence of such ownership
Refers to ownership which is Best proof of ownership of a
represented by the OCT or
piece of land
TCT
That upon which ownership
Mere evidence of
is based
ownership, not the title of
the land itself
Evidence of the right of the
Evidence of the title which
owner or the extent of his
the owner has
interest
2.
4. The curtain principle

CURTAIN PRINCIPLE
One does not need to go behind the certificate of title

because it contains all the information about the title
of its holder
Dispenses with the need of proving ownership by long

complicated documents
Assures that all the necessary information regarding

ownership is on the certificate of title.
SEC. 41
1. Issuance of the owners duplicate certificate.
OWNERS DUPLICATE CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
delivered to the registered owner or his duly

authorized representative.
o If two or more persons are the registered
owners,
one owners duplicate may be

issued for the whole land, or
if the co-owners so desire, a

separate duplicate may be issued
to each of them in like form,
but all outstanding certificates of title so issued shall

be surrendered whenever the Register of Deeds shall
register any subsequent voluntary transaction
5.
Mere issuance of a certificate of title does not

foreclose an action to test its validity
POSSESSION OF A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
Not conclusive as to the holders true ownership of all

property describe therein.
Which includes, by mistake or oversight, lands which

cannot be registered under the Torrens System
28

affecting the whole land or part thereof or any interest
therein.
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.
Exception:
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.
(1) Issuance of mortgagees/lessees duplicate

certificate discontinued
PRESENT RULE
No mortgagees or lessees duplicate certificate

shall be issued by ROD, and
those issued prior to the effectivity of PD No.

1529 on June 11, 1978 are deemed cancelled
and the holders thereof shall surrender the same
to the RODs concerned.
(2) Co-owner can only dispose of his aliquot share in
the property held in common
A CO-OWNER
may dispose of is ONLY his undivided aliquot (definite

fractional share) share,
o which shall be limited to the portion which
may be allotted to him upon the termination
of the co-ownership.
has no right to divide the property into parts and then

convey one part by metes and bounds.
(3) Surrender of owners duplicate is conclusive
authority for the ROD to enter a new certificate or
a memorandum of registration
WITHOUT THE PRESENTATION OF THE OWNERS
DUPLICATE,
the ROD is not authorized to make registration.
2.
Registered owner entitled to possession of the

owners duplicate.
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

owners duplicate.
2.
Generally, purchaser need not go behind registry to

determine condition of property.
Where there is nothing in the certificate of title to indicate any
cloud or vice in the ownership of the property, or any
encumbrance thereon,
purchaser is not required to explore farther than what

the Torrens title upon its face indicates
o in quest for any hidden defect or inchoate
right that may subsequently defeat his right
thereto.
3. Meaning of lien, encumbrance.
SEC. 42.
SEC. 43.
1. Registration book; contents of transfer certificate of
title.
TCT shall indicate
number of the next previous certificate covering the

same land and
the fact that it was originally registered,
the record number,
number of the original certificate of title, and
the volume and page of the registration book in which

it is filed.
SEC. 44
1. Certificate of title free from liens except those noted
thereon.
General Rule:
Lien
-
29
Is a charge on property usually for the payment of

some debt or obligation.
Is a qualified right or a proprietary interest, which may
be exercised over the property of another
Is a right which the law gives to have a debt satisfied
out of a particular thing

-
compensation. Specifically, Section 19 withholds from

a purchaser of a friar land exclusive right to any canal,
ditch, reservoir, or other irrigation works, or to any
water supply upon which such irrigation works are or
may be dependent, but this applies only where the
servitude was already existing at the time of purchase.
It 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
Encumbrance
A burden upon land, depriciative 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
(4) PD No. 27, or the Tenant Emancipation Decree
The Decree provides: The tenant farmer, whether in

land classified as landed estate or not, shall be
deemed owner of a portion constituting a family-size
farm of five (5) hectares if not irrigated and three (3)
hectares if irrigated;
(1) Superior lien in favor of government

The superior lien in favor of the government on the
properties of the delinquent taxpayer, which need not,
under Section 44 of PD No. 1529, be noted on the certificate
of title to be binding on a subsequent purchaser.
The lien in favor of the government is a precautionary

measure as the levy upon real property or any right or
interest therein may be easily defeated by a transfer or
conveyance of the property by the delinquent taxpayer.
(2) ) Unpaid real estate taxes

It is not necessary to register a tax lien because it is
automatically registered, once the tax accrues, pursuant
to section 44.
(3) Public highway
If a person obtains title, under the Torrens system,

which includes, by mistake or oversight, lands which
cannot be registered under the Torrens system, he
does not, by virtue of said certificate alone, become the
owner of the land illegally included.
The inclusion of a public highway in the certificate of

title does not give to the holder of such certificate
ownership of the highway.
Section 44 which subjects the certificate of title to

public servitudes which may be subsisting, does not
apply, say, in the case of a road constructed
subsequent to the acquisition of the land.
In all cases, the landowner may retain an area of not

more than seven (7) hectares if such landowner is
cultivating such area or will now cultivate it;
The certificate of land transfer issued pursuant to PD

No. 27 provides that the tenant farmer is deemed to be
the owner of the agricultural land subject to the
conditions that the cost of the portion transferred to
him, including the interest, shall be paid in fifteen (15)
equal annual amortization, and that he must be a
member of a barrio association upon organization of
such association in his locality.
(5) RA No. 6657, or the Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Law
SEC. 6. Retention Limits.
xxx in no case shall retention by the landowner exceed
five (5) hectares.
Three (3) hectares may be awarded to each child of the
landowner, subject to the following qualifications:
(1) that he is at least 15 years of age; and
(2) that he is actually tilling the land or directly
managing the farm
Case: Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines,
Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform
The Supreme Court, through Justice Cruz declared

that RA No. 6657 is a valid exercise by the State of the
police power and the power of eminent domain.
The Court held that the law is not an ordinary

expropriation where only a specific property of
relatively limited area is sought to be taken by the State
from its owner for a specific and perhaps local
purpose, but deals with a revolutionary kind of
expropriation (which) affects all private agricultural
lands.
Case: Digran v. Auditor General- the government,

without prior expropriation proceedings, constructed a
municipal road passing through lot Ruperta Cabucos.
The Court ruled that Section 39 of the Land
Registration Act (Section 44 of the Property
Registration Decree) does not apply to cases where,
as in the case at bar, the road was constructed
subsequent to the acquisition of the land. It would be
unfair, said the Court, for the government to take back
the land without just compensation after selling it and
collecting the full price therefor. To do so would abridge
the owners individual right guaranteed by the
Constitution to own private property and keep it, free
from State appropriation, without due process and
without just compensation. The Court further ruled that
Sections 19, 20 and 21 of Act No. 1120 sanction no
authority for the government to take private lands
covered by said Act for public use without just
(6) Public land patents

Public land patents, when duly registered in the
Registry of Deeds, are veritable Torrens titles subject
to no encumbrances except those stated therein, plus
those specified by the statute.
30

1. Contents of a certificate of title.
Every certificate of title shall contain the following entries:
(a) full names of all persons whose interest make up the full
ownership in the land;
(b) civil status;
(c) names of their respective spouses, if married;
(d) citizenship; and
(e) residence and postal address. If the property belongs to the
conjugal partnership, the title shall be issued in the names of
both spouses.
Section 118 and 112 of the Public Land Act (CA No.
141, as amended) provide limitations on the right of the
homestead or free patentee to alienate the land subject
of patent.
By express provision of Section 118 of the Public Land
Act, and in conformity with the policy of the law to
preserve the land in the public land applicant and his
family, any transfer or alienation of a free patent or
homestead within five years from the issuance of the
patent is proscribed. Such transfer nullifies said
alienation and constitutes a cause for the reversion of
the property to the State.
2. All property of the marriage presumed conjugal;

exception.
Art. 160. All property of the marriage is presumed to

belong to the conjugal partnership, unless it be proved
that it pertains exclusively to the husband or to the
wife.
(7) Other Statutory Liens
Section 60 of CA No. 141 prohibits, except when

authorized by Congress, the sale of alienable
lands of the public domain that are transferred to
government units or entities.
Section 60 of CA No. 141 constitutes, under
Section 44 of PD No. 1529, a statutory lien
affecting title of the registered land even if not
annotated on the certificate of title. Alienable lands
of the public domain held by government entities
under Section 60 of CA No. 141 remain public
lands because they cannot be alienated or
encumbered unless Congress passes a law
authorizing their disposition.
Congress, however, cannot authorize the sale to
private corporations of reclaimed alienable lands
of the public domain because of the constitutional
ban.
Only individuals can benefit from such law.
Case: De Leon v. De Leon- at the time Bonifacio and Anita

contracted marriage, provides that all property of the marriage
is presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership unless it is
proved that it pertains exclusively to the husband or the wife.
Case: Domingo v. Reed- the wife may not bind the conjugal
assets without a special authorization from the husband.
(1) Rule where title is in the name of only one spouse
The presumption under Art. 160 of the Civil Code

cannot prevail when the title is in the name of only one
spouse and the rights of innocent third parties are
involved.
Case: Ponce De Leon v. Rehabilitation Finance Corporation
There being no showing as to when the property in

question was acquired . . . the fact that the title is in the
wifes name alone is determinative.
had the property been acquired by them during

coverture, it would have been registered, in the name
not of Francisco Soriano, married to Tomasa
Rodriguez, but of the spouses Francisco Soriano and
omasa Rodriguez.
4. Purpose of the provision on statutory lien
Sec 44 declares that every owner of registered land

shall hold the same free and clear from any and all liens
and encumbrances except those noted in the
certificate of title and those mentioned and excepted in
that section.
The purpose is to give to the person registering, and to
his transferee for value, an absolutely clean title, one
not subject to hidden defects, to undeveloped or
inchoate claims, to any sort of restriction, limitation or
reduction except those named in the certificate of
registration or described in the law.
Case: Litam v. Espiritu
All the said properties are registered in the name of

Marcosa Rivera, married to Rafael Litam.
This circumstance indicates that the properties in

question belong to the registered owner, Marcosa
Rivera, as her paraphernal properties, for if they were
conjugal, the titles covering the same should have
been issued in the names of Rafael Litam and Marcosa
Rivera.
The words married to Rafael Litam written after the

name of Marcosa Rivera, in each of the above
mentioned titles are merely descriptive of the civil
statue of Marcosa Rivera, the registered owner of the
properties covered by said titles.
SEC. 45. Statement of personal circumstances in the

certificate. Every certificate of title shall set forth the full
names of all persons whose interests make up the full
ownership in the whole land, including their civil status, and
the names of their respective spouses, if married, as well
as their citizenship, residence and postal address. If the
property covered belongs to the conjugal partnership, it
shall be issued in the names of both spouses.
Case: Philippine National Bank v. Court of Appeals
31

The subject properties when mortgaged to the PNB

were registered in the name of Donata Montemayor,
widow.
In processing the loan applications, the PNB had the
right to rely on what appears in the certificates of title
and no more.
On its face the properties were owned by Donata
Montemayor, a widow.
The PNB had no reason to doubt nor question the
status of said registered owner and her ownership
thereof. Indeed, there are no liens and encumbrances
covering the same.
(1) Prescription unavailing not only against the

registered owner but also his heirs
SEC. 46. General incidents of registered land. Registered

land shall be subject to such burdens and incidents as may
arise by operation of law. Nothing contained in this decree
shall in any way be construed to relieve registered land or
the owners thereof from any rights incident to the relation
of husband and wife, landlord and tenant, or from liability
to attachment or levy on execution, or from liability to any
lien of any description established by law on the land and
the buildings thereon, or on the interest of the owner in
such land or buildings, or to change the laws of descent, or
the rights of partition between co-owners, or the right to
take the same by eminent domain, or to relieve such land
from liability to be recovered by an assignee in insolvency
or trustee in bankruptcy under the laws relative to
preferences, or to change or affect in any way other rights
or liabilities created by law and applicable to unregistered
land, except as otherwise provided in this Decree.
(2) Registered of mortgage does not make action

for foreclosure imprescriptible
Land registered under the Torrens system is, as a rule,

not subject to any burden except those noted on the
certificate of title.
What appears on the face of the title is controlling on
questions of ownership since the certificate of title is an
absolute and indefeasible evidence of ownership of the
property in favor of the person whose name appears
therein.
The land may be taken through eminent domain
proceedings, or subjected to liability in bankruptcy and
insolvency proceedings.
Laches
The failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and

unexplained length of time, to do that which by exercising
due diligence could or should have done earlier
Negligence or omission to assert a right within reasonable

time, warranting a presumption that the party entitled to
assert it either has abandoned it or declined to assert it.
Case: Panganiban v. Dayrit
Even registered owner of property may be barred from

recovering possession of property by virtue of laches.
Petitioners, for 45 years, did nothing to assert their right

of ownership and possession over the subject property.
1. Registered land cannot be acquired by prescription or

adverse possession.
The important effect of the registration of a mortgage is

obviously to bind third parties.
2. Registered owner may be barred from recovering

possession through laches.
SEC. 47. Registered land not subject to prescription. No

title to registered land in derogation of the title of the
registered owner shall be acquired by prescription or
adverse possession.
Prescription is unavailing not only against the

registered owner but also against his
hereditary successors because the latter
merely step into the shoes of the decedent by
operation of law and are merely the
continuation of the personality of their
predecessor in interest.
The legal heirs of a deceased may file an
action arising out of a right belonging to their
ancestor, without need of a separate judicial
declaration of their status as such, provided
there is no pending special proceeding for the
settlement of the decedents estate.
Case: Eugenio v. Perdido
Lands registered under the Torrens system,

ten years adverse possession may not be
permitted to defeat the owners right to
possession, which is a necessary incident of
ownership, otherwise loss of the land by
prescription would be indirectly approved.
1. Registered land subject to burdens or incidents by operation

of law.
Prescription is unavailing not only against the

registered owner but also against his hereditary
successors.
Lucas v. Gamponia
While defendant may not be considered as having

acquired title by virtue of his and his predecessors long
continued possession for 37 years, the original owners
right defendant has, by the long period of 37 years and
by patentees inaction and neglect, been converted into
a stale demand.
A title to land once registered is imprescriptible. No one

may acquire it from the registered owner by adverse,
open, and notorious possession.
The right to recover possession of the registered
property is equally imprescriptible since possession is
a mere consequence of ownership.
Lola v. CA
32

was filed only on July 21, 1981, twelve (12) years after the
registration of the sale to Rosendo de la Calzada. The dismissal
of the complaint was upheld since petitioners failed and
neglected for an unreasonably long time to assert their right to
the property in Rosendos possession. The principle of laches
is a creation of equity. It is applied, not really to penalize neglect
or sleeping upon ones right, but rather to avoid recognizing a
right when to do so would result in a clearly inequitable
situation.
Petitioners acquired title to the land owned by

respondent by virtue of the equitable principles of
laches due to respondents failure to assert her claim
and ownership for thirty-two (32) years.
Miguel v. Catalino
Appellants passivity and inaction for more than thirtyfour (34) years justifies the defendant-appellee in
setting up the equitable defense of laches.
(1) Elements of laches
4. Arradaza v. Court of Appeals, the Court held: There is

evidently a failure or neglect for an unreasonable and
unexplained period of time to do what they claimed they were
entitled to do, where petitioners failed to institute any action for
reconveyance nor did they seek reconveyance until about
twenty-five (25) years from the execution of the deed of sale.
(a) Conduct on the part of the defendant, or of one under whom

he claims, giving rise to the situation of which complaint is made
for which the complaint seeks a remedy;
(b) Delay in asserting the complainants rights, the complainant
having had knowledge or notice of the defendants conduct and
having been afforded an opportunity to institute a suit;
(c) Lack of knowledge or notice on the part of the defendant that
the complainant would assert the right on which he bases his
suit; and
(d) Injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is
accorded to the complainant, or the suit is not held to be barred.
5. 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) Doctrine of laches is inapplicable where the action was

filed within the prescriptive period
Laches will operate not really to penalize neglect or

sleeping on ones rights, but rather to avoid recognizing
a right when to do so would result in a clearly
inequitable situation.
SEC. 48. Certificate not subject to collateral attack. A

certificate of title shall not be subject to collateral attack. It
cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled except in a direct
proceeding in accordance with law.
3. Other illustrative cases of laches

1. Caragay-Layno v. Court of Appeals, for twenty (20) years
from the date of registration of title in 1947 up to 1967 when the
suit for recovery of possession was instituted, neither the
registered owner, up to the time of his death in 1951, nor his
successors in- interest, had taken steps to possess or lay
adverse claim to the disputed portion. They were, therefore, held
to be guilty of laches as would effectively derail their cause of
action.
1. Certificate of title cannot be the subject of collateral

attacke
The validity of the certificate of title can be threshold

only in a direct proceeding filed for the purpose.
A torrens title cannot be attacked collaterally.

Torrens title can be attacked only for fraud, within one year after
the date of the issuance of the decree or registration. Such
attack must be direct, and not by a collateral proceeding.
Case: Catores v. Afidchao, an action for recovery of property
filed by respondent, petitioner alleged that the area which she
occupied is not within the titled property of respondent and that
respondents title is replate with errors in the technical
description of the property. These allegations, according to the
Court, constitute a collateral attack against respondents title
because petitioner ascribes errors in respondents title that
would require a review of the decree of registration which cannot
be allowed in accion publiciana.
2. Golloy v. Court of Appeals, petitioner and his predecessor

or predecessors had been in continuous possession of the
disputed portion in the concept of an owner, for almost fifty (50)
years, i.e., from August 15, 1919, when the property was
registered in the name of respondent, up to February, 1966
when such possession was disturbed by respondents causing
the placement of two (2) monuments inside his land. It was held
that if respondent had any right at all to the overlapped portion,
such right has been lost through
laches. Although the defense of prescription is unavailing to the
petitioners because, admittedly, the title to Lot No. 5517 was still
registered in the name of respondent, the petitioners had
nonetheless acquired title to it by virtue of the equitable principle
of laches.
Caraan v. Court of Appeals, petitioners claim that the subject

property could not have been titled in fvor of private respondents
because the same had not yet been classified as alienable and
disposable land was not given consideration because, the issue
of the validity of the title of respondents can only be assailed in
an action expressly instituted for that purpose.
3. De la Calzada-Cierras v. Court of Appeals, petitioners

complaint to recover the title and possession of Lot Bo. 4362
33

3. A direct attack on the title may be made in a counterclaim or
third-party complaint.
Salandanan v. Mendez, the Court reiterated that when property

is registered under the Torrens System, the registered owners
title to the property is presumed legal and cannot be collaterally
attacked, especially in a mere action for unlawful detainer.
Manotok v. Barque, the cancellation of the Manotok title cannot

arise incidentally from the administrative proceeding for
reconstitution of the Barque title even if the evidence from that
proceeding revealed the Manotok title is fake. Nor could it have
emerged incidentally in the appellate review of the LRAs
administrative proceeding. Neither the Court of Appeals nor the
LRA had jurisdiction to cancel the Manotok title. The court
further said that such title can only cancelled by the proper RTC
in a direct proceeding assailing its validity.
A counterclaim is essentially a complaint, hence, it can be

considered as a direct attack, not collateral, attack on the
subject title.
Case: Leyson v. Bontuyan, an action is a direct attack on a

title if its object is to nullify the same, and thus challenge the
proceeding pursuant to which the title was issued. A direct attack
on a title may be in an original action or in a counterclaim
assailing it as void. A counterclaim is considered a new suit and
is to be tested by the same rules as if it were an independent
action.
In a case for recovery of possesion based on ownership (accion
reivindicatoria), the Court, reiterated that if the object of the thirdparty complaint is to nullify the title of the third-party defendant,
the third-party complaint constitutes a direct attack on the title
because the same is in the nature of an original complaint for
cancellation of title.
Rodriguez v. Court of Appeals, Rodriguez, asserting that he

was Landichos lawful successor- in interest, filed an omnibus
motion before the RTC seeking the issuance of a decree of
registration and an OCT in his name for the subject property.
Rodriguez acknowledge the existence of a TCT of PCCAI for the
same property, but he alleged that certificate of title is spurious.
It was held that the RTC had no jurisdiction to grant such relief
in the registration case since it is a collateral attack at PCCAIs
title.
DBP v. CA and Cajes, the question on validity if TCT No. 10101

for the counterclaim can be considered a direct attack on the
same. A counterclaim is considered a complaint; it is the original
defendant who becomes the plaintiff.
Tolentino v. Laurel, petitioners attack on the legality of TCT,

issued in the name of respondents, was only incidental to their
quest to defend their possession of the property in an accion
publiciana, and was considered as a collateral attack on the title.
4. Where to file action
Must be instituted with the proper RTC

5. Other illustrative case of collateral and direct attack on
the title
Green Acres Holdings, Inc. v. Cabral, the Court held that the
attempt to cancel the titles of Green Acres by a mere motion for
the issuance of a writ of execution of a decision rendered in a
case where said titles were not in issue is a collateral attack on
the titles.
1. Director of Lands v. Gan Tan, the Court ruled that the issue
as to whether or not an alien is qualified to acquire land covered
by a Torrens title can only be raised in an action expressly
instituted for that purpose. A Torrens title as a rule is irrevocable
and indefeasible, and should be maintained and respected
unless challenged in a direct proceeding.
Republic v. Samson- Tatad, the prohibition against collateral

attack does not apply to spurious or non-existent titles, since
such title does not enjoy indefeasibility. The rule is that
indefeasibility of title does not attach to titles secured by fraud
and misrepresentation. It is as if no title was ever issued and
therefore that is hardly the occasion to talk of collateral attack
against a title.
2. Ybaez v. Intermediate Appellate Court, the administrative

investigation conducted by the Director of Lands is solely to
determine whether or not fraud had been committed in securing
such title. It is not intended to invalidate the Torrens certificate
of the registered owner of the land.
2. Distinction between a direct and collateral attack on the

title.
3. Carvajal v. CA, an application for registration of an already

titled land constitutes a collateral attack on the existing title.
Direct Attack
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.
When the object of the action is to annul or set aside such

judgment, or enjoin its enforcement
SEC. 49. Splitting, or consolidation of titles. A registered

owner of several distinct parcels of land embraced in and
covered by a certificate of title desiring in lieu thereof
separate certificates, each containing one or more parcels,
may file a written request for that purpose with the Register
of Deeds concerned, and the latter, upon the surrender of
the owners duplicate, shall cancel it together with its
original and issue in lieu thereof separate certificates as
desired. A registered owner of several distinct parcels of
Indirect/ Collateral
when, in an action to obtain a different relief, an attack on

the judgment is nevertheless made as an incident thereof.
34

land covered by separate certificates of title desiring to
have in lieu thereof a single certificate for the whole land,
or several certificates for the different parcels thereof, may
also file a written request with the Register of Deeds
concerned, and the latter, upon the surrender of the
owners duplicates, shall cancel them together with their
originals, and issue in lieu thereof one or separate
certificates as desired.
Alfonso v. Office of the President, any owner desiring to

subdivide a tract of registered land into lots shall submit to
the LRA a subdivision plan of the duly approved by Lands
Management Bureau, through the Regional Technical Director,
or the Administrator of LRA, together with the approved
technical description and the corresponding owners duplicate
certificate of title. Xxx desiring to consolidate several lots into
one or more shall file with the LRA a consolidation plan showing
the lots affected, with their technical descriptions, and upon
surrender of the owners duplicate certificates and receipt of the
plan duly approved by the LRA, the Registry of Deeds shall
cancel said certificates and issue a new on for the consolidated
lots.
SEC. 50. Subdivision and consolidation plans. Any

owner subdividing a tract of registered land into lots which
do not constitute a subdivision project as defined and
provided for under
P.D. No. 957, shall file with the Commissioner of Land
Registration or with the Bureau of Lands a subdivision plan
of such land on which all boundaries, streets, passageways
and waterways, if any, shall be distinctly and accurately
delineated.
2. Conveyance of only a portion of the land

If only a portion of the land described in the certificate of title is
conveyed, the Register of Deeds shall not enter any new title in
favor of the grantee until after a plan indicating the portions into
which the land has been subdivided shall first be presented,
together with the technical descriptions thereof.
If a subdivision plan, be it simple or complex, duly approved

by the Commissioner of Land Registration or the Bureau of
Lands together with the approved technical descriptions
and the corresponding owners duplicate certificate of title
is presented for registration, the Register of Deeds shall,
without requiring further court approval of said plan,
register the same in accordance with the provisions of the
Land Registration Act, as amended: Provided, however,
That the Register of Deeds shall annotate on the new
certificate of title covering the street, passageway or open
space, a memorandum to the effect that except by way of
donation in favor of the national government, province, city
or municipality, no portion of any street, passageway,
waterway or open space so delineated on the plan shall be
closed or otherwise disposed of by the registered owner
without the approval of the Court of First Instance of the
province or city in which the land is situated.
Upon approval of the plan and technical descriptions of the

portions into which the land has been subdivided, the same shall
be submitted to the Register of Deeds for annotation on the
certificate of title. He shall thereupon partially cancel the
grantors certificate as to the portion affected and issue (a) a new
certificate to the grantee covering the specific portion conveyed,
and (b) another certificate to the grantor for the remaining
portions. But the Register of Deeds, instead of canceling the
grantors title, may simply make a memorandum thereon to the
effect that a portion of the land has been conveyed and that the
title is deemed cancelled only insofar as that portion is
concerned.
3. Illegal enlargement of area.
A registered owner desiring to consolidate several lots into

one or more, requiring new technical descriptions, shall file
with the Land Registration Commission, a consolidation
plan on which shall be shown the lots to be affected, as they
were before, and as they will appear after the consolidation.
Upon the surrender of the owners duplicate certificates
and the receipt of consolidation plan duty approved by the
Commission, the Register of Deeds concerned shall cancel
the corresponding certificates of title and issue a new one
for the consolidated lots.
The Commission may not order or cause any change,
modification, or amendment in the contents of any
certificate of title, or of any decree or plan, including the
technical description therein, covering any real property
registered under the Torrens system, nor order the
cancellation of the said certificate of title and the issuance
of a new one which would result in the enlargement of the
area covered by the certificate of title.
The last paragraph of Section 50 reads:

The Commission may not order or cause any change,
modification, or amendment in the contents of any certificate of
title, or of any decree or plan, including the technical description
therein, covering any real property registered under the Torrens
system, nor order the cancellation of the said certificate of title
and the issuance of a new one which would result in the
enlargement of the area covered by the certificate of title.
The inclusion of additional or increased area to form part of the
original titled area, on the basis of a mere subdivision plan, is
unwarranted. In order to bring the increase in area under the
operation of the Torrens system, separate proceedings to
register the same should be filed instead of an ordinary approval
of the subdivision plan.
CHAPTER V
SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION
I. VOLUNTARY DEALINGS WITH REGISTERED LANDS
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Subdivision of registered land.
35

SEC. 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.
Title- is only the legal basis by which to affect dominion or

ownership.
Contracts- only constitutes titles or rights to the transfer or
acquisition of ownership
Delivery or tradition- is the mode of accomplishing transfer or
acquisition of ownership
(4) Rule in case of sale of real property; pricing agreement
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.
1. Formal requisites of contracts involving real property
Consent of the contracting parties;
Object certain which is the subject matter of the contract;
Cause of the obligation which is established.
In case of conflict between areas and boundaries, it is the latter

which should prevail.
The use of more or less or similar words in designating the
quantity covers only a reasonable excess or deficiency.
(1) Form is important for validity, convenience and

enforceability
Unit price contract- the purchased price is determined by

way of reference to astated rate per unit area (e.g., P1,000
per sq. meter)
Lump sum contract- states the full purchase price for an
immovable the area of which may be declared based on the
estimate or where both the area and boundaries are stated
(e.g., P1 million for 1,000 sq. meters)
(5) Rule in case of sale of conjugal property
Donation of real property must be in a public instrument to

be valid.
Mortgage must be recorded in the Registry of Deeds to be
validly constituted.
Sale of real estate, whether made as a result of private
transaction or of foreclosure of execution sale, becomes
legally effective against third persons only from the date of
its registration.
Art. 124. The administration and enjoyment of the conjugal

partnership shall belong to both spouses jointly xxx
In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise
unable to participate in the administration of the conjugal
properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers of
administration. These powers do not include disposition or
encumbrance without authority of the court or the written
consent of the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or
consent, the disposition or encumbrance shall be void.
(2) Contracts in a public instrument is only for convenience

Xxx non compliance therewith does not adversely affect the
validity of the contract or the contractual rights and obligations
of the parties thereunder.
Guiang v. CA, the absence of the consent of one renders the

entire sale null and void, including the portion of the conjugal
property pertaining to the husband who contracted the sale.
(3) Contract is perfected by mere consent

Felipe v. Aldon, the court applied Art. 173 in a case where the
wife sold some parcels of land belonging to the conjugal
partnership without the consent of the husband. The court ruled
that the contract of sale was voidable subject to annulment by
the husband.
A contract of sale is perfected at the moment there is a meeting

of minds upon the thing which is the object of the contract and
upon the price.
If the words of the contracts appear to be contrary to the evident
intention of the parties, the latter shall prevail over the former.
2. Difference between contract of sale and contract to sell
The perfection of a contract of sale should not be confused with

its consummation. In relation to the acquisition and transfer of
ownership, it should be noted that the sale is not a mode, but
merely a title.
contract of sale
Title to the property
passes to the vendee
upon the delivery of the
thing sold
Mode- is the legal means by which dominion or ownership is

created, transferred or destroyed
Vendor loses ownership

over the property and
cannot recover it until
36
contract to sell
Ownership is reserved in
the vendor and is not to
pass to the vendee until
full payment of the
purchase price
Title is retained by the
vendor until full payment
of purchase price

and unless the contract
is resolved or rescinded
Non payment of the price
is negative resolutory
condition
Should
the
buyer
defaults in the payment
of the purchase price,
the seller may either sue
for the collection or have
the contract judicially
resolved or set aside.
or other encumbrancer for value. Thus, where a purchaser files

an adverse claim to registered land only after the same was
already mortgaged to the bank, upon the claim that he bought
the property long before before the mortgage, the right of the
bank to the property is superior to that of the purchaser.
Payment of the price is a

positive
suspensive
condition,
failure
of
which is not a breach but
an event that prevents
the obligation of the
vendor to convey title
from becoming effective.
If the buyer defaults in
the payment, the seller
can
only
sue
for
damages
(2) Registration of document ministerial on the part of the

Register of Deeds
The purpose of registering an instrument is to give notice thereof
to all persons; it is not intended by the proceedings for
registration to seek to destroy or otherwise affect already
registered rights over the land, subsisting or existing at the time
of the registration.
(3) As between the parties, registration is not essential for
validity of sale
(2) Delivery as a mode of transmission, real or constructive

Registration is not necessary to make it valid and effective, for
actual notice is equivalent to registration.
Modes of delivery:
Actual- placing the thing sold in the control and possession

of the vendee
Legal or constructive- execution of a public instrument

evidencing the sale; symbolical tradition such as delivery of
the keys of the place where the movable sold is being kept
The purpose of registration is merely to notify the interests of

strangers to a given transaction, who may be ignorant thereof,
and the non-registration of the deed evidencing said transaction
does not relieve the parties thereto of their obligation
thereunder.
(3) Execution of a public document equivalent to delivery
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. Indeed, no action for the enforcement of the contract
is needed, since the delivery of possession of the land sold
consummated the sale and transferred title to the purchaser.
(4) Dacion en pago
is the delivery and transmission or ownership of a thing

by the debtor to the creditor as an accepted equivalent
of the performance of the obligation
a special mode of payment where the debtor offers
another thing to the creditor, who accepts it as an
equivalent of the payment of an outstanding debt.
An objective novation of the obligation where the thing
offered as an accepted equivalent of the performance
of an obligation is considered as the object of the
contract of sale, while the debt is considered as the
purchase price.
(4) Actual Notice equivalent to registration

Even without the act of registration, a deed purporting to convey
or affect registered land shall operate as a contract between the
parties.
Registration is not necessary to give effect to the deed of sale
between the parties to the contract.
(5) Act of registration is the operative act to convey or affect

registered land
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 of contracts dealing with registered property in the

ROD binds or affects third persons.
Property Registration Decree only protects the holder in good
faith, and cannot be used as a shield for frauds.
A person dealing with registered land is merely charged with

notice of the burdens on the property which are noted on the
face of the register or the certificate of title.
(1) Importance of registration

Article 1544 of the Civil Code provides that if the same
immovable property is sold to different vendees, the ownership
shall belong to the person acquiring it who in good faith first
recorded it in the Registry of Property.
Notice of lis pendens serves a warning to the prospective

purchasers or encumbrancer 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.
Section 32 of PD No. 1529 extends the protection given to an

innocent purchaser for value to an innocent lessee, mortgagee,
37

2. Rights and obligations of a purchaser in good faith
Exception: To third persons, registration is

indispensable.
Conclusion: 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.
(7) Estoppel
Illustration: Failure of the purchaser of a parcel of land
in an execution sale to question on time the entry or
annotation made on the back of the TCT, to the effect
that the sale thereof in his favor was subject to
redemption within 1 year from the registration of said
certificate, estops him from claiming that the 1 year
period started earlier.
(8) Rule on good faith applicable to lessees and
mortgagees
Rule: A certificate of title is conclusive and binding
upon the whole world. This rule applies to lessees and
mortgagees.
Illustration: Where the certificate of title is in the name
of the mortgagor when the land is mortgaged, the
innocent mortgagee for value has the right to rely on
what appears on the certificate of title. In the absence
of anything to excite suspicion, he is under no
obligation to look beyond the TCT and investigate.
Conclusion: Thus, even if the mortgagor is not the
rightful owner of, or does not have a valid title to, the
mortgaged property, the mortgagee in good faith is,
nonetheless, entitled to protection.
(9) Banks, investment and realty corporations required to
exercise more care and prudence than private
individuals in dealings even with registered lands
Rule: The rule that persons dealing with registered
lands can rely solely on the certificate of title does not
apply to banks. Banks, as well as realty corporations,
are expected to exercise higher standard of diligence
in ascertaining the status of the property.
3. Registration of voluntary and involuntary instruments
affecting registered land distinguished
Rule:
Registration
of Requirement to have the effect
Instruments
of registration
Involuntary
An entry thereof in the day book
registration
is sufficient notice to all
(registration of an persons even if the owners
attachment, levy duplicate certificate is not
upon execution, presented to the RoD
notice
of
lis Exception: Sec 71, PD 1529
pendens etc.),
provides that the RoD may
require the registered owner to
produce the owners duplicate
certificate in order that an
attachment or other lien in the
nature of involuntary dealing
Innocent purchaser per value- one who buys the property of

another without notice that some other person has a right to or
interest in it, and who pays a full and fair price at the time of the
purchase or before receiving any notice of another persons
claim.
Obligation of a buyer entering into a contract of sale:
Payment of the consideration;
Performance of the first obligation in good faith, an

implied obligation but just as binding and as
important as the first.
Good Faith- means giving what one owes to the other without
concealment or evasion.
(1) Purchaser is not required to explore further than what
title indicates for hidden defects
It is basic that a person dealing with registered property need
not go beyond, but only has to rely on, the title. He is charged
with notice only of such burdens and claims which are annotated
on the
title, for registration is the operative act that binds the property.
(1) Purchaser is not required to explore further than what
title indicates for hidden defects
Rule: A person dealing with registered property need not
go beyond, but only has to rely on, title. But it does not
create or vest title. It cannot be a shield for the commission
of fraud.
(2) A purchaser who has knowledge of defect of his
vendors title cannot claim good faith
Exception: His mere refusal to believe that such defect
exists and his willful closing of his eyes to the possibility of
the existence of a defect in his vendors title, will not make
him an innocent purchaser for value.
(3) When purchaser should investigate
Exception: When the purchaser has (1) knowledge of a
defect or the lack of title in his vendor; or of (2) sufficient
facts to induce a reasonably prudent man to inquire into the
status of the title of the property in litigation.
(4) Sale of conjugal property
Rule: 2 kinds of diligence which must be observed in
buying conjugal property:
(1) Diligence in verifying the validity of the title
convering the property;
(2) Diligence in inquiring into the authority of the
transacting spouse to sell conjugal property on
behalf of the other spouse
(5) Sale of property pending litigation
Rule: Under Article 1544, mere registration is not
enough to acquire new title. Good faith much concur.
(6) Prior registration of a lien
Rule: Registration is not the operative act for a
mortgage to be binding between parties.
38

Voluntary
registration (i.e.
registration of a
deed of sale or
mortgage)
the same, and direct the entry of a new certificate

or memorandum upon such surrender; or
(b) If the registered owner or any person withholding
the duplicate certificate refuses to surrender the
same or if for any reason the outstanding owners
duplicate certificate cannot be delivered, order the
annulment of the same as well as the issuance of
a new certificate of title in lieu thereof
may be annotated thereon. If

the owner fails to comply, RoD
shall report such fact to the
proper RTC which shall, after
notice, direct the owner to
produce his certificate.
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:
a.) Presents and files a
duly notarized and
valid deed of sale and
the same is entered in
the day book;
b.) Surrenders
or
presents the owners
duplicate certificate of
title covering the land
sold; and
c.) Pays the registration
fees.
The RoD is duty bound to
perform it.
Exception: Non-production of the owners duplicate of

the TCT may not invalidate a vendees claim of
ownership where the subsequent vendees of the same
lot cannot be considered in law to be unaware of the
prior sale, on account of their relationship with the first
vendee since actual notice is equivalent to registration.
(3) Original owner may seek annulment of transfer on
ground of fraud
Rule: An original owner of a registered land may seek
the annulment of a transfer thereof on the ground of
fraud. Such a remedy is without prejudice, however, to
the right of any innocent holder for value of a certificate
of title.
2. Generally, a forged deed is a nullity and conveys no title
Rule: A forged deed is a nullity. The innocent purchaser for
value protected by law is one who purchases a title land by virtue
of a deed executed by the registered owner himself, not by a
forged deed, as the law expressly states.
Exception: A forged deed may be the basis of a good title in the
hands of a bona fide purchaser that is, if the certificate of title
has already been transferred from the name of the true owner
to the name of the forger or the name indicated by the forger,
and while it remained that way, the land was subsequently sold
to an innocent purchaser. For then, the vendee had the right to
rely upon what appeared in the certificate. The same is true even
if the forger stole the owners certificate.
Note: Rationale of the exception: A forger cannot
effectuate his forgery unless the owner has allowed
him, in some way, to get possession of the owners
certificate. Also, when the certificate was stolen, his
suffering can be equated to that of one whose money
or negotiable paper payable to bearer is stolen and
transferred by the thief to an innocent purchaser.
Remedy: (1) Bring an action for damages against those who
caused the fraud; and (2) if insolvent, an action against the
Treasurer of the Philippines may be filed for recovery of
damages against the Assurance Fund.
Section 53: Presentation of owners duplicate upon entry of

new certificate
1. Surrender of owners duplicate certificate is authority for
the Register of Deeds to enter registration
Rule: 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 owners duplicate of the certificate of title.
(1) Issuance of TCT without production of owners
duplicate certificate unwarranted
Rule: The issuance of a new TCT by the RoD to the
purchaser without the presentation of the owners
duplicate, is unwarranted and confers no right on the
purchaser.
(2) Remedy in case of refusal or failure to surrender
owners duplicate certificate
Rule: Where a voluntary or involuntary instrument
cannot be registered by reason of the refusal or failure
of the holder to surrender the owners duplicate
certificate of title, the party in interest: (1) may file a
petition in court to compel surrender of the same to the
RoD (Sec. 107, P.D. 1529); or (2) may file with the RoD
a statement setting forth his adverse claim as provided
in Sec 110 of Act 496 (in such a case, the annotation
of the instrument upon the entry book is sufficient to
affect the real estate to which it relates).
Case:
Blondeau vs Nano
FACTS:
Angela Blondeau, relying upon a Torrens title in the
name of Agustin Nano, loaned money in all good faith to the
latter as mortgagor on the basis of the title standing in his name,
only to thereafter discover that Nano had forged the signature of
the true owner, Jose Vallejo, which resulted in the issuance of a
title in Nanos name.
Upon the filing of the petition, the court, after hearing,

may take the following actions:
(a) Order the registered owner or any person
withholding the duplicate certificate to surrender
39

Rule: Should it be immovable property, the ownership shall
belong to the person acquiring it who in good faith first recorded
it in the Registry of Property.
HELD:
As between 2 innocent persons, Blondeau and Vallejo,
one of whom must suffer the consequence of a breach of trust,
Vallejo who made it possible by his act of confidence must bear
the loss. The Torrens system permits a forged transfer when
duly entered in registry, to become the root of a valid title in a
bona fide purchaser. The law erects a safeguard against a
forged transfer being registered by the requirement that no
transfer shall be registered unless the owners certificate is
produced along with the instrument of transfer. An executed
transfer of registered lands placed by the registered owner
thereof in the hands of another operates as a representation to
a third party that the holder of the transfer is authorized to deal
with the lands.
(1) Remedy of the aggrieved party

Rule: The purchaser from the owner of the later
registered certificate and his successors, should
resort to his vendor for redress.
4. Mortgagee in good faith
Rule: A mortgagee has a right to rely in good faith on the
certificate of title of the mortgagor of the property given as
security and in the absence of any sign that might arouse
suspicion, has no obligation to undertake further investigation.
Note: The doctrine of mortgagee in good faith does not apply to
a situation where the title is still in the name of the rightful owner
and the mortgagor is a different person pretending to be the
owner.
(3) Rule when owner is not at fault

Adriano vs Pangilinan
FACTS:
Petitioner entrusted the original owners copy of his certificate of
title to Salvador, a distant relative, for the purpose of securing a
mortgage loan. Without petitioners knowledge and consent,
Salvador mortgaged the property covered by the title to
respondent Pangilinan. Later, petitioner found an annotation on
his title of a supposed mortgage he executed in favor of
respondent. Petitioner denied having executed the mortgage
and denounced his signature on the deed as forgery. Petitioner
sued respondent for the return of his title but this was ignored.
The issue raised on appeal is WON respondent is a mortgagee
in good faith and for value.
HELD:
Petitioner is faultless since he did not mortgage the property
himself nor did he authorize Salvador as his agent in procuring
the mortgage. A special attorney would have been necessary for
the purpose. A mortgage is invalid if the mortgagor is not the
owner of the property. Since the respondent, as mortgagee,
admitted that he has been in the mortgage business for 7 years,
he should be deemed at fault for not verifying the identity of the
impostor mortgagor. His own negligence was the primary,
immediate and overriding reason for his predicament. However,
he is not precluded from suing Salvador and her cohorts.
5. Financial or banking institutions should exercise greater

care and prudence in their dealings even with registered
land than private individuals.
Rule: As to banking institutions, it is a matter of judicial notice
that before a bank grants a loan on the security of land, it first
undertakes a careful examination of the (1) title of the applicant
as well as (2) physical and on-the-spot investigation of the land
itself offered as security. If it did not conduct such examination
and investigation, it must be held to be guilty of gross negligence
in granting the loans, and cannot be considered as a mortgagee
in good faith.
Section 54: Dealings less than ownership, how registered
1. Memorandum of encumbrances
Rule: All interests in registered land less than ownership (i.e.
contract to sell) shall be entered I the RoD.
Mechanism: It is not necessary to issue a new certificate on the
basis of an instrument which does not divest the ownership or
title from the owner or from the transferee of the registered
owner. A brief memorandum of the nature of the instrument
entered on:
a.) Certificate of title shall serve as notice to third
parties of the instrument affecting property
b.) Owners duplicate certificate of title
Difference between Blondeau vs Nano and Adriano vs

Panganiban:
In Blondeau, the seller and the mortgagor appeared in the titles
as the registered owners, whereas in Adriano, the mortgagor
was an impostor, not the registered owner.
Section 55: Grantees name, nationality, etc., to be stated

1. Contents of the instrument presented for registration
Grantee
of
a Content
Voluntary Instrument
Person
Full name, nationality, status,
residence and postal address of
the grantee or person acquiring
interest under such instrument
Corporation
or Statement WON it is legally
Association
qualified to acquire private lands
(4) Recourse of the aggrieved party

Rule: A title issued to an innocent purchaser and for
value cannot be revoked on the ground that the deed
of sale was falsified, if he had no knowledge of the
fraud committed. The recourse of the person
prejudiced is to bring an action for damages against
those who caused or employed the fraud, and if the
latter are insolvent, an action for recovery of damages
against the Assurance Fund.
Section 56: Primary Entry Book; fees; certified copies

1. Primary entry book or day book
Definitions:
3. Rule in case double sale
40

a.) Primary entry book - a record of all instruments,
including copies of writs and processes, affecting
registered lands, which are entered by the RoD in the
order of their filing, upon payment of the proper fees
b.) Recording preliminary process in registration and
shall note the date, hour and minute of receipt of said
instruments
Note: An instrument shall be regarded as registered only from
the time it is so noted. The order of entries in the primary entry
book determines the priority in the registration.
Numberin
g and
endorsing
by RoD
with
proper
reference
to the
certificate
of title
(applies
to every
deed,
whether
voluntary
or
involuntar
y)
Records
and
papers
shall be
open for
examinati
on by the
public,
subject to
such
reasonabl
e
regulation
s as the
RoD may
prescribe
All deeds
and
voluntary
instrumen
ts and
copies
thereof
shall be
attested
and
sealed by
the RoD
Execute the
proper
deed of
conveyance
, in proper
form and
present the
same
together
with the
owners
duplicate
certificate
to the RoD
for entry
and
registration
Copies
with the
correspon
ding file
number
shall be
delivered
to the
person
presentin
g them
RoD
shall
enter in
the
registrat
ion book
the fact
of
conveya
nce and
then
prepare:
(1) a
new
certificat
e of title
in the
name of
the
grantee;
(2)
owners
duplicat
e
RoD shall
note
upon the
original
and
duplicate
certificat
e the: (a)
date of
the
conveyan
ce; (b)
volume
and
page; (c)
reference
by
number
to the
last
precedin
g
certificat
e
The
original
and
owners
duplicat
e of the
grantor
s
certificat
e shall
be
stamped
cancell
ed
The
deed of
conveya
nce shall
be filed
with a
notation
of the
number
and
place of
registrati
on of
the
certificat
e of title
of the
land
conveye
d
Section 58: Procedure where conveyance involves portion

of land
1. Procedure where only portions of the land are conveyed
I.
If a deed or conveyance is for a part only of the
land described in a certificate of title, the Register
of Deeds shall not enter any transfer certificate to
the grantee until:
1.) A plan of such land showing all the portions
or lots into which it has been subdivided; and
2.) The corresponding technical descriptions
shall have been verified and approved
(pursuant to Sec 50 of PD 1529)
Note: Such deed may only be annotated by way
of memorandum
II.
Memorandum
Where is it
Grantors certificate of title,
annotated?
original and duplicate
What is its
Serve as notice to third
purpose?
persons of the fact that
certain unsegregated
portion of the land has
been conveyed
When is it
Pending the actual
effectual?
issuance of the
corresponding certificate in
his name
2. Deeds entered in the day book, and upon payment of

filing fee, considered registered from the moment they are
so noted.
Rule: Deeds relating to
registered land shall, upon payment of the filing fee, be entered
in the primary entry book and they shall be regarded as
registered from the moment so noted.
3. Record is constructive notice of its contents.
Rule: When a conveyance has been properly recorded, such
record is constructive notice of its contents and all interests,
legal and equitable, included therein. Under the rule of notice,
it is presumed that the purchaser has examined every
instrument of record affecting the title. This presumption cannot
be overcome by proof of innocence or good faith.
4. Requirements for the registration of voluntary and
involuntary transactions
Kindly refer to Sec 52 Number 3 in table form above.
Section 57: Procedure in registration of conveyances
1. Procedure in registering a deed of conveyance
41

III.
Filing
with the
RoD for
annotatio
n in the
correspo
nding
certificat
e of title
constituting the pledge or mortgage have the free disposal of

their
property, and in the absence
thereof, that they be legally authorized for the purpose
(3) Characteristics of mortgage:
LIRIRA
Upon the approval of the plan and technical

descriptions the: (1) original of the plan and (2)
certified copy of the technical descriptions:
RoD shall
issue a new
certificate of
title and at
the same
time cancel
the grantors
certificate
partially with
respect only
to said
portion
conveyed or
if the
grantor so
desires, his
certificate
may be
cancelled
totally and a
new one
issued to
him
It is a limitation on
ownership
It is inseparable
Gen Rule: Pending
approval of said plan, no
further registration or
annotation of any
subsequent deed or other
voluntary instrument
involving the unsegregated
portion shall be effected by
the RoD.
It is a real property
It is indivisible
It is a real right
Exception: Unsegregated
portion was purchased
from the Government
It is an accessory
contract
Mortgage encumbers but does not

end ownership, and may thus be
foreclosed.
Mortgage adheres to the property
regardless of who its owner may
subsequently be
Mortgage on real property is by itself
real property also
Ex. A and B mortgaged their land to
C. Even if A already paid his share,
mortgage on As share is not yet
extinguished
Mortgage binds a purchaser who
knows of its existence or if the
mortgage was registered
Mortgage is also void if principal
obligation is void but, if a mortgage
debt is void, the principal contract
may still be valid
3. Mortgagor must be the owner of the property mortgaged

Rule: For a
person to validly constitute a valid mortgage on real estate, he
must be the absolute owner thereof, otherwise the mortgage is
void.
Unless and until the mortgagee purchases
the mortgaged real estate at public auction and the property is
not redeemed within the prescribed period, the mortgagee
does not acquire title to the mortgaged real estate.
(1) Mortgage invalid even in the hands of an innocent
mortgagee where the title convers non-registrable
land
4. Mortgage lien is a right in rem which follows the
property: it is a lien on the property whoever its owner may
be. It subsists notwithstanding a change in ownership
5. Mortgages intended to secure future advancements are
calid contracts; blanket mortgage clause
Blanket mortgage clause- also known as dragnet clause
Purpose: convenience and accommodation
to borrowers
(1) enable the parties to provide continuous
dealings, the nature or extent of which
may not be known or anticipated at the
time; and
(2) they avoid the expense and
inconvenience of executing a new
security on each new transaction
Section 59: Carry over of encumbrances

1. Carrying over of encumbrances in the new certificate
Rule: 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.
Exception: Where said encumbrances or annotations were
simultaneously released or discharged
(B) MORTGAGES AND LEASES
Sec 60: Mortgage or lease of registered land
1. Essence of a mortgage: property has been identified or set
apart from the mass of the property of the debtor-mortgagor as
security for the payment of money or the fulfillment of an
obligation to answer the amount of indebtedness, in case of
default of payment
(1) Object of mortgage:
Only the
ff property may be the object of mortgage:
(a) Immovables;
(b) Alienable real rights in
accordance with the laws imposed upon immovable.
(2) Requisites of mortgage (Art 2085):
SAF
6. Equitable mortgage
Equitable mortgage- one which, although lacking in some
formality, form words, or other requisites
demanded by a statute, reveals the
intention of the parties to charge a real
(a) That
they be constituted to secure the fulfillment of a principal
obligation;
(b) That the
pledgor or mortgagor be the absolute owner of the thing
pledged or mortgaged;
(c) That the persons
42

property as security for a debt and contains nothing impossible
or contrary to law
Article 1602 of NCC provides that a contract of sale with right
to repurchase shall be presumed to be an equitable mortgage
in ff:
IPERTS
(a) When the price of the sale is unusually
inadequate;
(b) When the vendor remains in
possession as lessee or otherwise;
(c) When upon or after the expiration of the
right to repurchase another instrument
extending the period of redemption or
granting a new period is executed;
(d) When the purchaser retains for himself
a part of the purchase price;
(e) When the vendor binds himself to pay
the taxes on the thing sold; and
(f) In any other case where it may be fairly
inferred that the real intention of the
parties is that the transaction shall
secure the payment of a debt or the
performance of any other obligation
For a presumption of an equitable mortgage to arise, 2
requisites must be satisfied:
(a) That the parties entered into a contract denominated
as a contract of sale; and
(b) That their intention was to secure an existing debt by
way of mortgage
3. Rights of innocent mortgagee for value

Rule: An innocent purchaser for value includes an innocent
lessee, mortgagee, or other encumbrance for value. Although
Article 2085 of the Civil Code provides that absolute ownership
of the mortgaged property by the mortgagor is essential, the
subsequent declaration of a title as null and void is not a
ground for nullifying the mortgage right of a mortgagee in good
faith. It must be respected even if the mortgagor obtained his
title thereto through fraud.
Remedy: Persons prejudiced should bring an action for
damage against those who caused the fraud, and if insolvent,
an action against the Treasurer of the Philippines for recovery
of damages against the Assurance Fund.
(1) Rule with respect to banks
Rule: The degree of diligence required of banks is more
than that of a good father of a family. The bank is not
allowed to rely merely on the protective mantle of the land
registration law, which is normally accorded only to
purchasers or mortgagees for value and in good faith.
(2) Illustrative cases:
In Gonzales vs IAC, Blanco vs Esquierdo, Penullar vs
PNB and St. Dominic Corp vs IAC:
The Court held that where the Torrens title of the land
was in the name of the mortgagor and later given as
security for a bank loan, the subsequent declaration
of said title as null and void is not a ground for
nullifying the mortgage right of the bank, which had
acted in good faith. Being an innocent mortgagee for
value, its right or lien upon the land mortgaged must
be respected and protected even if the mortgagors
obtained their title thereto through fraud.
Section 61: Registration

1. Registration of mortgage or lease (or any interest less
than ownership)
File with RoD the
instrument which
creates or
transfers or claims
such interests
Upon presentation of instrument for

registration, RoD shall enter upon the original
and duplicate certificate a memorandum,
date and time of filing and file number and
sign
Meanwhile, in Malayan Bank vs Lagrama:

When the mortgage was constituted, the bank was
not yet, properly speaking, a transferee being a mere
mortgagee of the property. Since the bank acquired
the land in question with knowledge of the fraud
committed by the mortgagor, it cannot claim to be a
purchaser in good faith, and therefore, to have a
better right than its predecessor-in-interest.
2. Recorded mortgage is a right in rem

Rule: The recording of the mortgage puts the whole world on
constructive notice of its existence and warns everyone who
thereafter deals with the property on which it was constituted
that he would have to reckon with that transaction.
(1) Unrecorded mortgage valid and binding upon the

parties
Rule: A mortgage, whether registered or not, is
binding between the parties, registration being
necessary only to make the same valid against third
persons.
(2) Alienation of mortgage credit

Rule: Even if the alienation is not registered, it would
still be valid as between the parties inasmuch as
registration is needed only to affect third parties.
A notice of Lis Pendens is an announcement to the

whole world that a particular real property is in
litigation, and serves a warning that one who acquires
an interest over does so at his own risk. However,
Any subsequent lien or encumbrance annotated at
the back of the COT cannot in any way prejudice the
mortgage previously registered.
A forged deed of mortgage cannot be enforced
against owner.
In Reyes v De leon, the SC held that between an
unrecorded sale of a prior date and a recorded
mortgage of a later date, the former is preferred to the
43

In case of non-redemption, the purchaser at foreclosure sale
shall file with the Register of Deeds, either a final deed of sale
executed by the person authorized by virtue of the power of
attorney embodied in the deed of mortgage, or his sworn
statement attesting to the fact of non-redemption; whereupon,
the Register of Deeds shall issue a new certificate in favor of
the purchaser after the owner's duplicate of the certificate has
been previously delivered and canceled.
latter for the reason that if the original owner had

parted with his ownership of the thing sold then he no
longer had the ownership and free disposal of that
thing so as to be able to mortgage it again.
Sec. 62- Discharge or Cancellation- A mortgage or lease on
registered land may be discharged or cancelled by means of
an instrument executed by the mortgagee or lessee in a form
sufficient in law, which shall be filed with the ROD who shall
make the appropriate memorandum upon the Certificate of
Title.
What is Pactum Comissorium? It is a stipulation in

a contract of mortgage that the owership of the
property would automatically pass to the mortgagee
In case no redemption was effected within the
stipulated period. It is a void stipulation as it is
contrary to public policy.
Elements of Pactum Comissorium:
1. There should be a property mortgaged by way of
security for the payment of the principal
obligation;
2. There should be a stipulation for automatic
appropriation by the creditor of the thing
mortgaged in case of non-payment of the
principal obligation within the stipulated period.
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.
When a debt is secured by a mortgage and there is a

default in payment on the part of the mortgagor, the
mortgagee has a choice of one of two remedies,
but he cannot have both. The mortgagee may:
a. Foreclose the mortgage; or
b. File an ordinary action to collect the debt.
Options of a secured creditor in case of death of

the debtor:
a. To waive the mortgage and claim the entire debt
from the estate of the mortgagor as an ordinary
claim;
b. To foreclose the mortgage judicially and prove
any deficiency as an ordinary claim; and
c. To rely on the mortgage exclusively, foreclosing
the same at anytime before it is barred by
prescription, without right to file a claim for any
deficiency.
An action to enforce a right arising from a mortgage

should be enforced within 10 years from the time the
right of action accrues. Otherwise, it will be barred by
prescription and the mortgage creditor will lose his
rights under the mortgage.
There are two types of foreclosure: judicial and

extrajudicial
NOTE: Judicial foreclosure is governed by Rules of

Court, while extrajudicial foreclosure is governed by
Act. No. 3135.
Sec 63- Foreclosure of Mortgage- (a) If the mortgage was

foreclosed judicially, a certified copy of the final order of the
court confirming the sale shall be registered with the Register
of Deeds. If no right of redemption exists, the certificate of title
of the mortgagor shall be canceled, and a new certificate
issued in the name of the purchaser.
Where the right of redemption exists, the certificate of title of
the mortgagor shall not be canceled, but the certificate of sale
and the order confirming the sale shall be registered by a brief
memorandum thereof made by the Register of Deeds upon the
certificate of title. In the event the property is redeemed, the
certificate or deed of redemption shall be filed with the Register
of Deeds, and a brief memorandum thereof shall be made by
the Register of Deeds on the certificate of title of the
mortgagor.
If the property is not redeemed, the final deed of sale executed
by the sheriff in favor of the purchaser at a foreclosure sale
shall be registered with the Register of Deeds; whereupon the
title of the mortgagor shall be canceled, and a new certificate
issued in the name of the purchaser.
JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE OF MORTGAGE (Sec 3,

Rule 68, ROC)
a. After debtor incurred in default, the court, upon
motion, shall order the property to be sold under
Rule 39 of the ROC;
b. Such sale shall not affect the prior encumbrances
upon the property;
c. When confirmed by the court, upon motion, it
shall operate to divest the rights in the property of
all the parties to the action and to vest their rights
in the purchaser, subject to the rights of
redemption as may be alowed by law;
d. Upon the finality of the order or confirmation or
expiration of the period of redemption, the
(b)
If the mortgage was foreclosed extrajudicially, a
certificate of sale executed by the officer who conducted the
sale shall be filed with the Register of Deeds who shall make a
brief memorandum thereof on the certificate of title.
In the event of redemption by the mortgagor, the same rule
provided for in the second paragraph of this section shall
apply.
44

e.
purchaser shall be entitled to the possession of

the property unless a third party is actually
holding the land adversely. In this case, writ of
possession may be requested;
The order of confirmation of the sale shall be
registered with the ROD. If no redemption- COT
shall be cancelled and a new one shall be issued
to the purchaser. If property is redeemedmortgagors COT shall stand uncancelled but the
COT, the order confirming it, and the deed of
redemption shall be filed with the ROD and a
brief memorandum thereof be noted on the
mortgagors COT.
3.
Once redemption price is determined, the

mortgagor must pay the same in FULL within a
reasonable time. (tender and consignation to the
court is preferred)
ACT 3135- EXTRAJUDICIAL FORECLOSURE

a. After default of the debtor, mortgagee may file a
petition with the office of the sheriff of the
province where the sale is to be made (notice
and pulication shall be made);
b. The sheriffs certificate of sale shall be filed with
the ROD;
c. A brief memorandum will be entered on the
mortgagors COT
d. In case of redemption- same procedure in judicial
foreclosure shall be followed
e. If no redemption- 1. Thi final deed of sale by the
official authorized for the purpose, or his 2.
Certificate of non-redemption, shall be filed with
ROD who shall cancel the mortgagors COT and
issue a new on to the purchaser.
BASIC PRINCIPLES on JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE

OF MORTGAGE (Rural Bank of Oroquieta vs CA)
a. It is the confirmation by the court of the auction
sale that would divest the mortgagors of their
rights to the mortgage lot and that would vest
such rights in the bank as purchaser at the
auction sale.
b. The clause subject to such rights or redemption
as may be allowed by law found in Sec 3, has no
application to a case where the mortgagor did not
exercise his right of redemption under sec 78 of
the general banking law.
c. Until the sale is confirmed, the court retains
control of the proceedings.
d. For the foreclosure sale to be valid, there must
be a hearing given to the interested party to show
cause why the sale should not e confirmed.
e. The confirmation retroacts to the date of the sale.
f. Notice and hearing of a motion for confirmation of
sale are essential to the validity of the order of
confirmation.
g. An order of confirmation, void for lack of notice
and hearing, may be set aside anytime.
h. After the foreclosure but before its confirmation,
the court may grant the judgment debtor or
mortgagor an opportunity to pay the proceeds of
the sale and thus refrain from confirming it.
i. If after the foreclosure sale and before the
confirmation, the purchaser sold the land to
another, the mortgagor can still redeem the
property by paying the judgment debt and the
expenses of the sale and costs.
j. Judicial foreclosure rules are liberally construed.
Courts are to assist rather defeat the right of
redemption
k. After confirmation, the mortgagor cannot redeem
anymore the mortgaged lot (unless a banking
institution).
l. It is after the confirmation of the sale, mortgagor
loses all interest I the mortgaged property.
When can there be an extrajudicial foreclosure?

An extrajudicial foreclosure sale is proper only when it
is provided in the real estate mortgage contract. The
clerk of court is duty-bound to examine applications
for extrajudicial foreclosure.
Rules for redemption of Foreclosed lands
a. Judicial foreclosure- General rule: No right of
redemption exists.
Exception: 1. Mortgagee
is a banking institution;
2.
Redemption by way of
equity of redemption.
What is Equity of Redemption? Mortgagors may
redeem by paying their secured debt prior to the
confirmation of the sale.
b.
Extrajuducial foreclosure- RULE: Redemption

shall be made within 1 year from the date the
certificate of Sale was registered.
Rule where land covered by homestead or free

patent is mortgaged
1. Rural Bank
a. Mortgagor may redeem within 2 years from
the registration of the sale (RA 720)
b. Failure to redeem, he or his heirs may
redeem or repurchase the property within 5
years from the expiration of the 2 year period
(CA 141)
Note: 2 yrs + 5 yrs= 7 yrs redemption period
3 CRITICAL DIMENSIONS IN JUDICIAL

FORECLOSURE
1. Timely redemption or redemption by expiration
date
2. Good faith, as the filing of the action must be for
the purpose of determining the redemption price
and not to stretch the redemptive period
indefinitely
2.
45
Ordinary Bank or other than Rural Bank

a. Mortgagor may redeem w/in 1 yr from the
registration of the sale (ACT 3135)
b. Failure to redeem, he or his heirs may
redeem or repurchase the property within 5

years from the expiration of the 1 yr period
(CA 141)
Note: 1 yr+ 5 yrs= 6 yrs redemption period
EQUITY OF REDEMPTION vs RIGHT OF

REDEMPTION
Equity Redemption- Right of the mortgagor to
redeem the mortgaged property after his default in the
performance of the conditions of the mortgage before
the confirmation of the sale.
Right of Redemption- Right of the mortgagor to
repurchase the property even after confirmation of the
sale, in cases of foreclosure by banks, within 1 year
from the registration of the sale.
A writ of possession is an order by which the sheriff

is commanded to place a person in possession of a
real or personal property. It may be issued in the
following instances:
a. Land registration proceedings which is a
proceeding in rem to place the applicant or
oppositors, or whoever is the successful litigant,
in possession of the property
b. In an extrajudicial foreclosure of a realty
mortgage
c. In a judicial foreclosure of mortgage, a quasi in
rem proceeding, provided that the mortgagor is in
possession of the mortgaged realty and no third
person, not a party to the foreclosure suit, had
intervened
d. In execution sales.
The proceeding in a petition for a writ of possession is

ex parte and summary in nature. Consequently, there
is no need for the purchaser to implead the
mortgagors as respondents, and the latter cannot
claim denial of due process when the court takes
cognizance of the petition.
General rule: Purchaser in a public auction sale of a
foreclosed property is entitled to a writ of execution,
and upon an ex parte petition of the purchaser, it is
ministerial upon the trial court to issue the writ.
Exception (Sec 33, rule 39 ROC): Issuance of writ
not ministerial where third party is in adverse
possession or is not privy to the debtor.
46

Condensed Notes 2nd Exam

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Condensed Notes 2nd Exam

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CONDENSED NOTES BASED ON AGCAOILI LAND TITLES AND DEED

intended for public use or for public service forms part

Classification under the 1973 Constitution

(4) Categories of Alienable and Disposable Lands

Classification under the 1987 Constitution

CA No. 141 ( Public Land Act, Enacted on November

How public land may be acquired? (Republic V. Fabio )

(5) Requirements to establish classification

(1) System of Classification

CASE: Republic V. Fabio It is not enough for the PENRO

Sec. 6, CA No. 141 The President through a

DAO No. 20, May 30, 1998 CENRO may issue

(6) Only A & D Lands may be subject of disposition

(2) Classification of Land According to Ownership

If public land is removed from the ambit of public

Land belonging to the state that is not of such

CONDENSED NOTES BASED ON AGCAOILI LAND TITLES AND DEED

Sec. 10 The words alienation, disposition, or

Sec. 8, trial courts had jurisdiction to adjudicate these lands to

CASE: Heirs of Amunategui v. Director of Forestry Unless and

3. Burden of proof rests with applicant to overcome

(7) Classification of Boracay Island

P.D. 705 (revided Forestry Code) respects titles

Proclamation No. 1064, May 22, 2006 proclamation

(8) Public Land and Government Land Distinguished

Public Land equivalent to public domain, and does not by any

CASE: Heirs of Amunategui v. Director of Forestry The ruling

Philippine Bill of 1902, and the first Public Land Act

The Government owns real estate which is part of the

III. Non- Registrable Properties

(9) Cadastral Survey of a municipality Does not

Property of the Public Dominion - refers to things held by the

CASE: Director of Lands v. CA and Valeriano A survey made

2. Under the Spanish Regime, all Crown lands were per se

CONDENSED NOTES BASED ON AGCAOILI LAND TITLES AND DEED

intended for some public service; or

Art. 5, PD 1067 - The following (waters) belong to the State:

Art. 6, PD 1067 - The following waters found on private lands

(5) A and D lands held by government entities under Sec.

Continuous or intermittent waters rising on such lands;

Section 60 of CA No. 141 constitutes, under Section 44

Alienable lands of the public domain must be

All other property possessed by any of them is

(3) Land may be alienated when no longer needed for public

(6) Lands titled in the name of government entities form part

CONDENSED NOTES BASED ON AGCAOILI LAND TITLES AND DEED

CASE: Government of the Phil. Islands v. Abella Whether the

(2) For property belonging to the Republic of the Philippines, but

(3) Sec. 48(b), CA No. 141, applies only to A and D lands

Most important product of a watershed is WATER.

These properties, however, become properties of the

CASE: Director of Forestry v. Villareal Mangrove swamps are

Section 85, PD No. 1529 - authorizes the Register of

SEC. 4. Ownership of Mineral Resources. Mineral resources

CASE: Director of Lands v. Abanzado Forest lands cannot be

The State shall recognize and protect the rights of the

These instruments may be validly amended, modified,

CONDENSED NOTES BASED ON AGCAOILI LAND TITLES AND DEED

CASE: Republic V. AFP - RSBS National parks shall be

CASE: Palomo v. CA - where a certificate of title covers a

9. Foreshore lands and reclaimed lands

Foreshore lands and submerged lands (which may be

CA No. 141 - the National Assembly passed the Public