AN OVERVIEW OF LAND TITLES AND DEEDS.
rae 1
AN OVERVIEW OF LAND TITLES AND DEEDS
1. Importance of the Subject
a. Man - Land Ratio
b. Land as a finite resource
II. GOVERNINING LAWS
1. PD 1529 otherwise known as "The Property Registration Decree".
Approved June 11, 1978 codified and incorporated the following laws
related ti property registration:
a. Act 496, The Land Registration Act
b. Commonwealth Act 141, The Public Land Act
c. Act 2259, The Cadastral Act
d. Act 3344, System of Registration for Unregistered Lands
e. Act No. 1508, as amended, The Chattel Mortgage Law
f. Republic Act No. 26, REconstitution of Original Certificates of Title
g. PD 27, Emancipation Patents, Land Reform Law
2. The Civil Code Provision (Articles 708 - 711)
Title IX
a. Art. 708. The Registry Property has for its object the inscription or
annotation of acts and contracts relating to the ownership and other
rights over immovable property.
b. Art. 709. The titles of ownership, or of other rights over immovable
property, which are not duly inscribed or annotated in the Registry of
Property shall not prejudice third persons.
c. Art. 710. The books in the Registry of Property shall be public for
those who have a known interest in ascertaining the status of the
immovables or real rights annotated or inscribed therein.
d. Art. 711. For determining what titles are subject to inscription or
annotation, as well as the form, effects, and cancellation of
inscriptions and annotations, the manner of keeping the books in the
Registry, and the value of the entries contained in said books, the
provisions of the Mortgage Law, the Land Registration Act, and
other special laws shall govern.
THE TORRENS SYSTEM
1. The Legal Basis and Nature (Sec 2, PD 1529)
Nature of registration proceedings; jurisdiction of courts. - Judicial
proceedings for the registration og lands throughout the Philippines shall
be in rem and shall be based on the generally accepted principles
underlying the Torrens system.
2. Purpose and meaning of the Torrens System of Registration.
a.) The real purpose of the system is to quiet title of land; to put a stop
forever to any question of the legality of the title, except claims which were
noted at the time of registration, in the certificate, or which may arise
subsequent thereto. That being the purpose of the law, it would seem that
once a title is registered, the owner may rest secure, without the necessity
of waiting in the portals of the courts, or sitting in the "mirador de su casa",
to avoid the possibility of losing his land. (Legarda vs. Saleeby 31 Phl 590)
b.) The main purpose of the Torrens System is to avoid possible conflicts
of title to real estate and to facilitate transactions relative thereto by giving
the public the right to rely upon the face of the Torrens Certificate Title and
to dispense with the need of inquiring further, except when the party
concerned has actual knowledge of the facts and circumtances that should
impel a reasonably cautious man to make such further inquiry. (Traders
Royal Bank vs CA 315 SCRA 190)
2. Jurisdiction
a. Regional Trial Court
Courts of First Instance (RTC) shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all
applications for original registration of title to lands, including
improvements and interest therein, and over all petitions filed after original
registration of title, with power to hear and determine all questions arising
upon such applications or petitions. (Sec 2, PD 1529)
b. Pursuant to Sec 34 of Batas Pambansa 129, the Supreme Court issued
Administrative Order No 64-93 dated April 21, 1993, authorizing METC's,
MTCC's and MTC's to hear and decide, Cadastral or Land Registration
cases covering Lots where there is no controversy or opposition, or
contested lots, the value of which does not exceed P100,000.00 for MTC's
and P200,000.00 for METC's.
IV. ORIGINAL REGISTRATION
1. Original Registration under Sec 14, Pd 1529
Who may apply:
A.) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest
have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and
occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a
bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
In Republic vs CA and Corazon Naguit GR No 144057, Janurary 17,
2005, the Supreme Court held that:
"Sec 14(1) of PD 1529 merely requires the property sought to be
registered as already alienable and disposable at the time of
application for registration of title is filed."
"If the State, at the time the application is made, has not yet deemed it
proper to release the property for alienation or disposition, the
presumption is that the government is still reserving the right to utilize
the property, hence, the need to preserve its ownership is the State
irrespective of the length of adverse possession even if in good faith."
"However, if the property has already been classified as alieanable and
disposable, then there is already an intention on the part of the State to
abdicate its exclusive prerogative over the property."
"There are no material differences between Sec 14 (1) of the Property
Registration Decree and Sec 48 (b) of the Public Land Act. True, the
Public Land Act does refer to "agricultural lanf of the public domain,"
while the Property Registration Decree uses the term "Alianable and
Disposable lands of public domain." It must be noted though that the
Constitution declares declares that "alienable lands of public domain
shall be limited to agricultural lands. Clearly, the subject lands under
Sec 48 (b) of the Public Land Act and Sec 14(1) of the Property
Registration Decree are of the same type."
B.) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under
the provisions of existing laws.
"Prescription is one of the modes of acquiring ownership under the
Civil Code. There is a consistent jurisprudential rule that properties
classified as alienable public land may be converted into private
property by reason of open, continuous and exclusive possession of at
least 30 years. With such conversion, such property may now fall
within the comtemplation of "Private Lands" under Section 14(2), and
thus susceptible to registration by those who have acquired ownership
through prescription. Thus, even if possession of the alienable public
land commenced on a date later than June 12, 1945, and such
possession being open, continuous and exclusive, then the possessor
may have the right to register the land by virtue of Section 14(2) of the
Property Registration Decree" (Republic vs CA and Naguit)
C.) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or abandoned
river beds by right of accession or accretion under the existing laws.
Accretion is the slow and hardly perceptible accumulation of soil deposits
that the law grants to the riparian owner. (Binalay vs Manolo, 195 SCRA
374)
D.) Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner
provided by law.
2. Judicial Confirmation of Imperfect or Incomplete Title under Sec 48 (b)
of CA 141.
Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have
been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and
occupation of agricultural lands of the public domain under a bona fide
claim of acquisition of ownership, for at least 30 years immediately
preceding the filing of the application for confirmation of title, except when
prevented by war or force majeure. Those shall be conclusively presumed
to have performed all the conditions essential to a government grant and
shall be entitled to a certificate of title under the provision of this chapter.
The period to avail of this provision has been extended to Dec 31, 2020
pursuant to RA 9176 , approved Nov 13, 2002 with the limitation that the
area applied for should not exceed 12 hectares.
3. Cadastral Act, Ac 2259 (Involuntary Proceedings)
Compulsory proceedings are premised on the presumption under the
Regalian Doctrine. That all Lands of whatever classifications belong to the

public domain. Once instituted in court, all private claims to land are open
to question and it is to the public interest that such private claims be
settled and adjudicated.
4. Administrative Method
Free Patent, Homestead and Sale Provisions
A.) Whenever lands of the public domain are disposed of by the DENR
through free patent, homestead and sales, they shall be brought under the
operation of the Torrens System.
Thus Sec 103 of PD 1529, states:
"Whenever public lanf is by the Government alienated, granted, or
conveyed to any person, the same shall be brought forthwith under the
operation of this Decree. It shall be the duty of the official issuing the
instrument of alienation, grant, patent or conveyance in behalf of the
Government to cause such instrument to be filed with the Register of
Deeds of the province or city where the land lies, and to be registered like
other deeds and conveyance whereupon a certificate of title shall be
entered as in other cases of registered land, and an owner's duplicate
issued to the grantee."
B.) Emancipation Patent or Certificates of Land Ownership Awards
(CLOA)
Whenever a tenant or farm worker is issued a patent, the same shall
also be transmitted to the Register of Deeds for registration under Sec 104
and 105 of PD 1529 and the issuance of the corresponding Certitficate of
Title, this bringing the land under the operation of the Torrens System.
C.) Indefeasilibility of a title obtained through thr administrative method.
An original certificate of title issued on the basis of a patent
partakes of the nature of a certificate of title issued in a judicial proceeding
and becomes indefeasible upon the expiration of one year from the date of
promulgation of the order of the Director of Lands for the issuance of
patent. (Heirs of Gregorio Tingco vs Heirs of Jose Alinaias, 168 SCRA
198)
V. STEPS IN THE ORIGINAL REGISTRATION OF TITLE
1. Survey - In Director of Lands vs. Reyes, et al, 68 SCRA 177 -182. The SC
ruled:
"The applicant is not relieved from submitting in evidence the original plan
approved by the Director of Lands as required by law. One of the
distinguishing marks of the Torrens System is the absolute certainty of the
identity of a registered land. Consequently, the primary purpose of the said
requirements is to fix the exact or definite identity of the land as shown in
the plan and technical description."
2. Application - Discussed earlier as to where to file.
3. Setting the Date of Initial Hearing
Not earlier than 45 days nor more than 90 days from the date of the order
(Sec 23, PD 1529)
4. Transmittal of the Order of the Court to the LRA
5. Preparation and Issuance of the Notice of Initial Hearing
6. Publication, registed mail and posting (Sec 3, Pd 1529)
" Sec 23 states that publication in the Official Gazette shall be sufficient to
confer jurisdiction upon the Court. However, in Director of Lands vs. CA
(276 SCRA 276-287) the SC ruled that the publication in a newspaper of
general circulation is equally a mandatory jurisdictional requirement. "The
elementary norms of due process require that before the claimed property
is taken from the concerned parties and registered in the name of the
applicant. The said parties must be given notice and opportunity to
oppose.
7. Opposition
Shall be filed by any person who claims the land or any interest therein.
8. Initial Hearing and Presentation of Evidence.
A. General Default
B. Default Order is entered
AN OVERVIEW OF LAND TITLES AND DEEDS. rae 2
C. All applicants must overcome the presumption that the land sought to
be registered form part of the public domain. (Republic vs CA and Naguit
Supra)
D. Tax declarations when coupled with proof of actual possession are
strong evidence of ownership (Gonzaga vs CA SCRA 327)
E. A foreign national may apply for registration of title over a parcel of land
which he acquired by purchase while still a citizen of the Philippines
(Republic vs CA and Lapiña, 235 SCRA 567)
F. A private corporation may apply for judicial confirmation of title to public
agricultural land because if a price of land of the public domain has been in
open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession under a bona fide
claim of ownership for a period prescribed by law, the land after the lapse
of said period Ipso Jure ceases to form part of the public domain and
becomes private property, thus removing it from the ambit of the
constitutional prohibition (Republic vs CA 155 SCRA 344)
G. Spanish Titles - PD 892, effective Feb 16, 1976, invalidated all Spanish
titles and declared that they can no longer be used as evidence of land
ownership. They shall then be treated as unregistered lands.
H. Judgment - Shall become final after 15 days from notice, there can be
no execution of judgment pending appeal in land registration proceedings.
9. Decree of Registration for the Land to be issued by the Administrator,
LRA
10. Original Certificate of Title
The land Registration Authority has devised a form where the decree and
the original certificate of title are embodied in the same document.
VI. CHARACTERISTICS OF A TORRENS CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
Rules, principles, doctrines, and maximes of the Torrens system which were
culled from landmark decisions of the highest court on actual cases as
arranged by Prof. Gregorio Bilog in his book, "Land Title and Deeds", 2005
Ed.
A. Best Evidence of Ownership - A Torrens Certificate of Title is the best
evidence of ownership of the land described therein.
(See Vilanueva vs CA, 198 SCRA 482
Ching vs CA, 181 SCRA 9,
Heirs of George Bofill vs CA, 237 SCRA 451,
Halili vs National Labor Relations Commissions, 257 SCRA 174,
Lee Tek Sheng vs CA, 292 SCRA 544)
B. Notice to the Whole World - A torrens title gives notice to the whole world;
or a Torrens title bind the whole world.
(See Egao vs CA, 174 SCRA 484,
National Grains Authority vs IAC, 157 SCRA 380,
Ching vs Malaya, 153 SCRA 412,
People vs Reyes, 175 SCRA 597)
The issuance of certificate of title is a constructive notice thereof to all
persons. (Serna vs CA, 308 SCRA 527, 529)
Registration of a deed sale in the Registry of Deeds constitutes constuctive
notice thereof to the whole world.
(See Calalang vs ROD of Quezon City, 208 SCRA 215,
People vs Pacificador, 354 SCRA 310)
No one can plead ignorance of the registration. (Egao vs CA, 174 SCRA 484,
Jacob vs CA, 244 SCRA 189)
C. Unregistered Claims - A Torrens title bars all prior claims not registered
on the title.
(See PD 1529 , Sec 44; Republic vs Umali 171 SCRA 647)
All claims and liens of whatever character existing against the land prior to
the issuance of certificate of title are barred, if not noted on said certificate
The registered owner of a Torrens Certificate of Title and the subsequent
purchaser for value and in good faith of registered land shall hold the
certificate free from all liens and encumbrances, except those noted in said
certifcate and those specified by law.
(See PD 1529 Sec 44 and 46, Republic vs Umali 171 SCRA 647, Felix Gochan and
Sons Realty Corp vs Cañada, 165 SCRA 207; Ferre-Lopez vs CA 150 SCRA 393;
Cureg vs IAC, 177 SCRA 313, Aldecoa and Co vs Warner Barns & Co, 30 Phil 209;
Snyder vs Fiscal of Cebu and Avila. 42 Phil 766)
 AN OVERVIEW OF LAND TITLES AND DEEDS. rae 3

D. Indefeasible - A Torrens certificate of title services as evidence of an The Torrens system only protects a title holder in good faith, and cannot
indefeasible title to the property in favor of the person whose names appear be used as shield for fraud and chicanery. Deceit is not to be
therein. countenanced; duplicity is not to be rewarded. (Philippine Commercial &
Industrial Bank vs Villalva, 48 SCRA 31)

( See Republic vs CA, 204 SCRA 160, Muyco vs CA, 204 SCRA 358, Tirado vs
Sevilla, 188 SCRA 321, Ortegas vs Hidalgo, 198 SCRA 6356, Jacob vs CA, 266 SCRA The Torrens title cannot cover up frauds. (Adille vs. CA, 157 SCRA 672)
189)

I. Forgery - Any registration procured by the presentation of a forged

Title to the property covered by a Torrens certificate becomes duplicate certificate of title, or a forged deed or other instrument shall be null
incontrovertible or indefeasible after one year from the entry of the decree and void (PD 1529 Sec 23)
if registration.

A forged instrument may become the "root of a valid title". (Torres vs CA, 186
**See SCRA 672)
PD 1529, Sec 32
Calalang vs. Register of Deeds of Quezon City, 208 SCRA 215
Reyes and Nadres vs Borbon and Director of Lands, 50 Phil 791 A fraudulent or forged document of sale may become the root of a valid title
Jacob vs Court of Appeals, 224 SCRA 189 if the certificate of title has already been transferred from the name of the
Trinidad vs IAC, 204 SCRA 524 true owner to the name of the forger or the name indicated by the forger.
Tirado vs Sevilla, 188 SCRA 321
(See Duran vs. IAC, 138 SCRA 489; De la Cruz vs Fabie, 35 Phil 14; Roman Catholic
Cagayan de Oro City Landless Residents Association, Inc, vs CA, 254 SCRA 220
Bishop vs Philippine Railway, 49 Phil. 546)
Republic vs CA, 204 SCRA 160
Muyco vs CA, 204 SCRA 358
Ortegas vs. Hidalgo, 198 SCRA 635 The doctrine that a forged instrument may become the root of a valid title
Republic vs De Guzman, 326 SCRA 267
cannot be applied where the owner still holds a valid and existing certificate
Heirs of Simplicio Santiago vs Heirs of Mariano E. Santiago, 404 SCRA 193
of title covering the same interest in a realty. (Torres vs CA, 186 SCRA 672)

E. A Torrens Title is Imprescriptible

(See PD 1529, Sec 47; Vda. de Villanueva vs CA, 351 SCRA 12) J. Loss -As between two innocent persons, the one who made it possible for
the wrong to be done should be the one to bear the resulting loss(See: Legarda
vs CA, 280 SCRA 642; Cabuhat vs CA, 366 SCRA 176; Tomas vs. Tomas, 98 SCRA
No title to registered land in derogation of the title of the unregistered 280; Traders Royal Bank vs. CA, 315 SCRA 190)
owner shall be acquried by prescription or adverse possesion.
As between two persons, both of them whom are in good faith and both
See: innocent of any negligence, the law must protect and prefer the lawful
PD 1529, Sec 17 holder of registered title over the transfer of a vendor bereft of any
Viacrucis vs CA, 44 SCRA 176 transmissible rights. (Baltazar vs. CA, 168 SCRA 354; Torres vs CA, 186 SCRA
J.M. Tuason and Co., Inc. vs CA, 93 SCRA 146 672)
Alarcon vs Bidin, 120 SCRA 390
umbay vs Alecha, 135 SCRA 427
Cimafranca vs IAC, 147 SCRA 611 K. Priority of Rights - "Prior tempore potior jure" -He who is first in time is
Gallardo vs. IAC, 155 SCRA 248 preferred in right.
Claudel vs. CA, 199 SCRA 133
Jacob vs. CA, 224 SCRA 198
Caiña vs. CA, 239 SCRA 252 The act of registration in the Registry of Deeds shall be the operative act to
Rivera vs. CA, 244 SCRA 218 convey or affect the lanf insofar as third persons are concerned.

The owner of the land registered under the Torrens System cannot lose it by L. Double Titles. Where two certificates of title include the same land, the
prescription certificate that is earlier in date prevails. (Garcia vs CA, 95 SCRA 380)

See:
M. Presumptions: Regular and Valid - Torrens title presumed to have been
Bishop vs CA, 208 SCRA 636
Ruvera vs CA, 244 SCRA 218 issued regularly and legally. (Salao vs Salao, 70 SCRA 65, Ching vs. Malaya, 153
J.M. Tuason and Co., Inc. vs CA, 93 SCRA 146 SCRA 412; Ofrecio vs. Lising, 159 SCRA 366, Republic vs. Umali, 171 SCRA 647;
Egao vs CA, 174 SCRA 484 People vs. Reyes, 175 SCRA 597, Bishop vs. CA, 208 SCRA 636)
Alarcon vs Bidin, 120 SCRA 390
Umbay vs Alecha, 135 SCRA 427
A strong presumption exists that a Torrens title is regularly issued and that it
Cimafranca vs IAC, 147 SCRA 611
Gallardo vs. IAC, 155 SCRA 248 is valid. (Salao vs Salao, 70 SCRA 65)
Claudel vs. CA, 199 SCRA 133
Jacob vs. CA, 224 SCRA 198
Caiña vs. CA, 239 SCRA 252
A Torrens title is presumed to have been issued regularly and legally,
Vda. de Villanueva vs CA, 351 SCRA 12 unless contradicted and overcome by clear, convincing, strong and
irrefutable proof. More than merely preponderant evidence is required.
(Ramos vs. CA, 112 SCRA 542)
F. Integrity of Titles -The integrity of the Torrens System must be protected.
Every person dealing with registered land may safely rely on the correctness
of the certificate of title issued therefore and the law will in no way oblige him Good Faith - The presumption is that the transferee of registered land is not
to go behind the certificate to determine the condition of the property. Staed aware of any defect in the title of the property he purchased. (Tajonera vs CA,
103 SCRA 467)
differently, an innocent purchaser for value, relying on a Torrens title issued, is
protected.
N. Reliance on the Title -Every person dealing with registered land may
safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of title issued therefore.
G. Not Subject to Collateral Attack - A certfificate of title shall not be subject (See Halili vs Court of Industrial Relations, 257 SCRa 174; Kho vs CA, 214 SCRA 329;
to collateral attack. It cannot be altered, modified or cancelled, except in a Legarda vs CA, 208 SCRA 642; Ibarra vs. Ibarra, Sr, 156 SCRa 616)
direct proceeding in accordance with law.

One who deals with properly registered under the Torrens System need
See. PD. 1529. Sec. 48; See also National Grains Authority vs IAC, 157 SCRA 380; not go beyond the same, but only has to rely on the title. He is charge with
Tan vs. Philippines Banking Corp., 355 SCRA 292; Windows and Orphans
Association, Inc. vs CA, 201 SCRA 165; Toyota Motor Phils. Corp vs CA, 216 SCRA
notice only of such burdens and claims as are annotated on the title.
(Domingo vs. Roces, 401 SCRA 197)
236)

H. Fraudulent Registration -The person in whose name the land is
fraudulently registered holds it as a mere trustee, with the legal obligation to
reconvey the properry and the title thereto in favor of the true owner. (Pajarillo
vs IAC, 176 SCRA 340)
A Torrens title cannot be used as a shield for fraud or for enriching a
person at the expense of another. (Vda. De Recinto vs Inciong, 77 SCRA 196;
Legarda and Prieto vs Saleeby, 31 Phil 590)
Exception: This principle does not apply when the party has acual
knowlege 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. One who falls withing the exception can neither be dominated
an innocent purchaser for value nor a puchaser in good faith. (Domingo vs.
Roces, 401 SCRA 197)

An innocent purchaser for value has every right to rely on the correctness
The Torrens system was not designed to shield and protect one who had of the title. (A.D. Guerrero vs. Juntilla, 173 SCRA 572; Gevero vs IAC, 189 SCRA
committed fraud or misrepresentation and thus holds title in bad faith. 201)
(Walstrom vs. Mapa, Jr., 181 SCRA 431)

He is not required to explore further than what the Torrens title on its face
indicates, in quest for any hidden defect or inchoate right that may
subsequently defeat his right thereto. (National Grains Authority vs. IAC, 157
SCRA 380; Duran vs. IAC 138 SCRA 489)
Where the title is in the name of the vendor when the land is sold, the
vendee for value has the right to rely on what appears on the title.
Where innocent third persons relying on the correctness of the certificate
of title issued, acquired rights over the property, the court cannot disregard
such rights and order the total cancellation of the certificate for that would
impair public confidence in the certificate of title, otherwise everyone
dealing with property registered under the Torrens System would have to
inquire in every instance as to whether the title had been regularly or
irregularly issued by the court.
A mortgagee has the right to rely on what appears in the certificate of title
and in the absence of anything to excite suspicion, he is under no
obligation to lock beyond the certificate and investigate the title of the
mortgagor appearing on the face of said certifcate.
A person dealing with registered land has a right to rely on the Torrens
certificate of title without the need of inquiring further, except when he has
actual knowledge of facts and circumstances that would impel a
reasonably cautious man to make such inquiry or when he has knowledge
of a defect of the lack of title of the other party or of sufficients to induce a
reasonably prudent man to inquire into the status of the title of the property
in litigation.
See Sandoval vs CA, 260, SCRA 283
State Investment House, Inc. vs CA, 254 SCRA 368
Tiburcio vs PHHC, L-13479, October 31, 1959
Capitol Subd., Inc. vs Province of Negros Occidental, 7 SCRa 60
Luz vs Manipon, 381 SCRA 788
Where the Torrens title is in the name of the vendor, the vendee has the
right to rely on what appears on the title; and, in the absence of anything to
arouse suspicion, the vendee has no obligation to look beyond the title.
(See: Pino vs CA, 198 SCRA 434
Centeno vs CA, 139 SCRA 545
Chit, Sr. vs Benelda Estate Dev Corp, 353 SCRA 424
Republic vs CA, 306 SCRA 81
O. Titles Derived from a Void Title are Also Void
If a certificate of title is void, all subsequent certificates of title derived
therefrom are also void because of the truism that the "spring cannot rise
higher than its source."
See
De Santos vs IAC, 157 SCRA 295
Calalang vs Register od Deeds of Quezon city, 231 SCRA 88
Mathay vs CA, 295 SCRA 556
This truism is in accord with the Latin maxim, "Nemo potest pius juris ad
allum transferre quam ipse habet," "No one can transfer a greater right to
another than he himself has."
VII. REMEDIES OF PERSONS AGGRRIEVED IN A LAND REGISTRATION
PROCEEDINGS
1. New Trial - Rule 37, Rules of Court
2. Relief from Judment - Sec 2, Rule 38 of the Rules of Court
3. Appeal - Sec 33 PD 1529 provides that judgment or orders of the court in
land registration cases are appeallable to the Court of Appeals and the
Supreme Court in the same manner as in ordinary actions.
4. Petition of Review - Sec 32 of PD 1529
A. Petition may be filed within one year from the entry of such decree of
registration.
B. On the ground of Actual or Extrinsic Fraud.
Extrinsic Fraud -refers to any fraudulent act of the successful pary in
litigation which is committed outside the trial of a case against the
defeated party whereby said defeated party is prevented from
presenting fully and fairly his side of the case.
AN OVERVIEW OF LAND TITLES AND DEEDS. rae 4
Intrinsic Fraud -refers to acts of a party in a litigation during trial which
did not affect the presentation of the case, but did not prevent a fair and
just determination of the case. (Sterling Investment Corp vs Ruiz, 30
SCRA 318)
C. The title has not passed to the hands of an innocent purchaser for
value.
5. Action of Reconveyance
Sec 96 of PD 1529 states: "that nothing in this decree shall be construed
to deprive the plaintiff of any right of action which he may have againnst
any person for such loss or damage or deprivation (of land or of any estate
or interest therein) without joining the National Treasurer as party-
defendant."
A. Grounds:
1. Fraud
2. Implied or Constructive Trust
3. Void Contract
B. When to Avail
1. On the ground of fraud - 4 yrs from discovery
2. Implied Constructive Trust presribes in 10 years
C. The period is to be reckoned from the date of issuance of the original
certificate of title.
D. If the party is in actual possession of the property, the action does not
prescribe.
6. Action for Damages. If the property has been passed to an innocent
purchaser for value, the aggrieved party may bring an ordinary action for
damages against the applicant. (Sec 32, PD 1529)
7. Action for Compensation from Assurance Fund.
Any person who sustains loss or damage, or is deprived of land or any estate
or interest byb reason of the operation of the Torrens System may file an
action for compensation against the Assurance Fund. (Sec 93 and 93 of PD
1529)
VIII. VOLUNTARY DEALINGS WITH REGISTERED LANDS
1. The act of registration is the operative act to convey or affect the land
insofar as third persons are concerned.
2. Entry along produces the effect of registration whether the transaction is
voluntary or involuntary as long as registrant complies with all the
requirements. (DBP vs RD of Nueva Ecija, 162 SCRa 450)
3. The production of the owner's duplicate whenever any voluntary instrument
is presented for registration shall be conclusive authority from the registration
shall be conclusive authority from the registered owner to the Register of
Deeds to enter a new certificate or to make a memorandum of registration.
(Sec 53 PD 1529)
4. The "Mirror Principle"
A purchaser is not required to explore beyond what the record in the registry
indicates on its face, in quest for any hidden defect or inchoate right which
may subsequently defeat his title thereto. (Chu Sr vs Benelda Estate Dev. Corp,
353 SCRA 424)
5. Prior physical delivery or possession is not legally required and the
execution of the Deed of Sale is deemed equivalent to delivery. (Power and Ind.
Corp. vs CA, 274 SCRA 59)
6. Even if only part of the property has been sold or alienated within the
prohibited period of 5 years such alienation is sufficient cause for the reversion
of the whole estate to the state (Republic vs CA 281, SCRA 639)
IX. INVOLUNTARY DEALINGS
1. ADVERSE CLAIM
Even after the lapse of thirty days as provided under Sec. 70 of PD 1529,
an adverse claim may be cancelled only upon order of the court. (Sajonas
vs CA, 258 SCRA 79)
2. LIS PENDENS
A notice of lis pendends is not confined only to cases involving the title to
or possesion of real property, but applies to suits brought to establish an
 AN OVERVIEW OF LAND TITLES AND DEEDS. rae 5

equitable estate, interest, or right, in specific real property or to enforce

any lien, charge or encumbrance against it. (Viewmaster vs Maulit, GR
136283, Feb 29, 2000)

" A notation of lis pendends neither affects the merits of a case nor creates
a right or a lien."

3. Surrender of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in Involuntary

Dealings.

Sec. 107 of PD 1529 provides:

"Where it is necessary to issue a new certificate of title pursuant to any

involuntary instrument which divest the title of the registered owner
against his consent or where a voluntary instrument cannot be registered
by reason of the refusal or failure of the holder to surrender the owner's
duplicate certificate of title, the party in interest may file a petition in court
to compel surrender of the same to the Register of Deeds."

Likewise, Sec. 80 of PD 1529 states:

"Every court rendering judgment in favor of the plaintiff affecting
registered land shall, upon petition of said plaintiff, order the parties
before it to execute for registration any deed or instrument necessary to
give effect to the judgment, and shall require the registered owner to
deliver his duplicate certificate to the plaintiff or to the Register of Deeds
to be cancelled or to have memorandum annotated upon it."

In the case of (Toledo-Bañaga vs CA, 302 SCRA 331) The Supreme

Court held:
"Petitioners otgher contention that the execution of the final and
executory decision - which is to issue title in the name of private
respondent - cannot be compelled by mandamus because of the formality
that the registered owner first surrenders her duplicate Certificate of Title
for cancellation per Sec. 80 of PD 1529 cited by the Register of Deeds,
bears no merit. In effect, they argue that the winning party must wait
execution until the losing party has complied with the formality of
surrender of the duplicate title. Such preposterous contention borders on
the absurd and has no place in our legal system."

4. Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortage

RA 8791, otherwise know as "The General Banking Law, approved on

May 23, 2000 modified the right of the morgagor to redeem the property
in an extrajudicial forclosure under the following conditions:

A. The mortgagor is a juridcal entity

B. The property has been mortgaged in favor of a bank, quasi-bank

or trust entity

C. The forclosure is done extra-judicially

If the forgoing conditions are present, the period of redemption will
now be as follows:

“The mortgagor shall have the right to redeem the property until
but not after, the registration of the certificate of foreclosure sale,
with the applicable Register of Deeds which is no case shall be
more than three months after forclosure, whichever is earlier."

Stated otherwise, the maximum period of redemption under this

new law is three months, and no longer 1 year as provided under
RA 3135. Thus, considering that the period of redemption is
reckoned after the date of the forclosure or until the registration of
the certificate of sale "Whichever is earlier", this period may be
shorter than 3 months as when the buyer, for instance, may
cause the registration of the certificate of sale immediately after
the forclosure sale.

X. RECONSTITUTION OF LOST OR DESTROYED ORIGINAL

Sec. 110 of PD 1529, abrograted the procedure relative to administrative
reconstitution of lost or destroyed certificates provided under RA 26/ However,
RA 6732 approved on June 8, 1989 allowed once again the administrative
reconstitution of original copies of certificates of title, but only when it is lost or
destroyed due to fire, flood, and other force majeure. Provided further that the
number of lost or damaged certificates should at least be 100% and the
number of certificates of titles lost or damaged be less than 500.00