LAND TITLES AND DEEDS I.

Introduction

You should know what is native title. Native title refers to ownership of land by Filipinos, indigenous people or cultural communities by virtue of possession in the claim of ownership before the Spanish conquest. Save for the foregoing: under the Regalian doctrine, all lands and natural resources belong to the Spanish crown by virtue of discovery and conquest. The effect is that private land title can only be acquired from the government either by purchase or by various modes of land grant under the Public Land Act or PD 1529 or the new law on indigenous cultural minority. However, as ownership of land is acquired, it can also be lost by adverse possession or extinctive prescription. And this is why the Philippines adopted what is known as the Torrens system. This is to put stability in ownership. Here the government will issue an official certificate of title attesting that person named is the owner of the property described therein subject only to such liens stated behind the title and to the liens provided by law. Title or ownership registered under the system therefore enjoys (1) indefeasibility after one year from entry of the decree, (2) imprescriptibility (3) immunity from collateral attack. First MCQ: the purpose of the Torrens system of the registration is: (a) to quiet title to land (b) to acquire ownership or title (c) to record all transactions involving the land (d) to identify the land. Answer is A. Now if you will look at the footnote, it also says to create an indefeasible title. So if instead of to quiet title to land what appears is to create an indefeasible title, then that is also the answer. Note: Registration is not a mode of acquiring title. Modes of acquiring title are: Sale, Novation, Succession, Prescription etc. It only confirms valid title. Neither is registration a shield for fraud because indefeasibility of the Torrens title does not apply where fraud attends the issuance of the title. Another MCQ: There are three co-owners, and without the knowledge of the two, the third co-owner sells the land to a buyer, who then applies for Land registration. The buyer, however, knows that the two other co-owners possess the land. Once the buyer gets the title and one year had lapsed since the issuance of the decree of registration or date of the entry of the decree, does his title become indefeasible? (a) Yes, because after one year of entry of decree, the buyers title has become indefeasible. (b) No, because the selling co-owner defrauded his co-owners and registration is not a shield to fraud. (c) Yes, but only in so far as the selling co-owners aliquot share is concerned.

(d) No, because once the certificate of title is issued, it is immune to collateral attack. Answer: (c) Remember to read the question carefully. Why (c)? Because the co-owner who sold the entire lot owns 1/3 of that lot. And therefore, can sell that validly to the buyer. Citizenship requirements For individual: only Filipinos except where an alien acquires ownership of land by hereditary succession. For corporations: under the Constitution, there is a prohibition against corporations acquiring land of the public domain except by lease. And as lessee, no matter how long you stay in that land, you cannot acquire that land. However, a corporation can acquire private land. So once the public land has become private, then a corporation may acquire such land and may register such land under the Torrens system, provided that that corporation is organized under Philippine laws, and at least 60% of its capital is owned by Filipinos. Then that corporation can apply for registration of private land. However, only the government can challenge the citizenship of the personality of the person who acquires the land based on citizenship. How is ownership of land registered under the Torrens system? (see land registration) II. Land Registration

Under Original Registration PD 1529, there are four (4) who may apply for registration: (a) Those who buy themselves or through their predecessors, have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable lands of the public domain under claim of ownership since June 12, 1945 or earlier; - The lands need not have been alienable and disposable for the entire period of possession (b) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under the provisions of existing laws; - This includes patrimonial property of the state - Public domain lands become patrimonial/private only upon a declaration that these are alienable and disposable and an express government manifestation that the property is already patrimonial or no longer retained for public service or the development of national wealth. - Only when the property has become patrimonial can the prescriptive period begin to run (10 years in good faith and w just title, 30 years regardless of good faith or just title) (c) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or abandoned river beds by right of accession or accretion under existing laws; and

(d) Those who have acquired ownership of lands in any other manner provided by law. For the first, 14(a), there are three (3) requirements: (1) The property is alienable land of the public domain. It must be declared as alienable and disposable. You need for a certification from DENR, or a Presidential Proclamation or a legislative act. In one case that it was only the surveyor who said that the land is already alienable and disposable, the Supreme Court said that will not allow a person to get registration under PD 1529. You have to show a certification of the DENR. The certification must show that the property sought to be registered was alienable and disposable at the time the application for registration is filed. This is the latest ruling of the Supreme Court. The earlier ruling is that, the certification should show that it was alienable at least since June 12, 1945. The Supreme Court became liberal that as long as at the time they filed the application for registration, it is already alienable and disposable, that will allow you to apply for registration. (2) Possession by themselves or by their predecessors must be open, continuous, exclusive, notorious possession and occupation of the property. Possession is open when it visible. You cannot posses that land only at night (patago). Then it must be continuous - that means it is uninterrupted. It must be notorious that means people generally know that you are in possession of that property. Possession alone is not sufficient to acquire title to alienable lands because the law requires possession and occupation. For possession, it must be physical and material. Occupation cannot be casual so the kaingeros cannot acquire and apply for registration because they come in and out, its just casual. Occupation means actual possession, and there must be a manifestation of acts of dominion such as introduction of improvements, building of a house, planting of crops, planting of trees that is occupation. (3) Such possession is under bonafide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945. MCQ: To be able to apply for registration of public land under Section 14(a) of PD 1529, the applicant must be: (a) In possession of the land since June 12, 1945; (b) In possession of the land openly and continuously for 30 years; (c) In possession and cultivation of the land openly and continuously since June 12, 1945; (d) In cultivation of the land openly and continuously for 30 years. Answer: (c) As the law now stands, mere showing of possession for 30 years or more is not sufficient. Thus, it must be shown that possession and occupation had started on June 12, 1945 or earlier. A claim of possession of land started in 1962, such is not sufficient basis to apply for registration under PD 1073 and PD 1529 because under those laws possession should be started since June 12, 1945 or earlier. However, even if the possession of alienable land commence only after June 12, 1945, application for

registration is still possible by virtue of Section 14(b) which states the prescription, but here the land must already be private. Example: X is in possession and cultivation of land prior to 1945, but does not register it, then sells it to Y, who does not also register it, that land, if all of the requirements have already been undertaken, becomes ipso jure private land (under Section 14(a)). Then Y sells it to Z, a corporation, and then the corporation after buying the land applies for land registration, that corporation even if he did not possess the land since 1945, but since it had acquired private land can now apply for registration. Here, open, exclusive and undisputed possession for the period prescribed by law converts ipso facto alienable and disposable public land into private land.

Registration under Commonwealth Act 141 If you compare Section 48(b) of Commonwealth Act 141 with Section 14(a) of PD1529, it almost a verbatim reproduction, except in Section 48, it says, in the end, except if prevented by war or force majeure, that does not appear in 1529. Registration under Republic Act 8371 (IPRA) Finally, under R.A. 8371, this is when the private individual belonging to a cultural community can acquire ancestral land in his own name. So remember, native land, native title, if a cultural minority is in possession under claim of ownership of land prior to the Spanish conquest, that belongs to that cultural community. Now if one of the members of that cultural community has segregated part of the land to be his and that is not objected to by the other members, then he can apply for land registration of that particular land in his own name.

Procedure in Original Registration: 1. Survey 2. Filing of the Petition 3. Publication and Posting 4. Filing of Opposition 5. Order of Default 6. Ocular Inspection 7. Hearing where you have to prove the identity of the land and to prove your ownership. 8. Judgment 30 days after receipt of Decision, the Judgment becomes final. Land registration is a special proceeding and therefore the Judgment becomes final not 15 days but 30 days after receipt of the Decision. Once it is final, then you can ask for a writ of possession so that all persons possessing that property up to the time of the Judgment you can send them out by the writ of possession. No need for Ejectment. Also upon finality of the Decision, the court issues an Order for issuance of a decree, sends that to the Land Registration Authority who issues a decree and then sends the decree to the Registry of Deeds. Once the Register of Deeds enters the decree and issues an original certificate of title, and evidences the ownership of land under the Torrens system.

Publication in the official gazette at least 30 days prior to the initial hearing is required to confer jurisdiction to the court. If you finish publication less than 30 days, then you have to ask the court to reset initial hearing and you publish again. If this requirement is not complied with, the court does not acquire jurisdiction. MCQ: Since land registration is a proceeding in rem, the notice of intial hearing must be published in the following, except: (a) Official Gazette; (b) Newspaper of general circulation; (c) Posting in the office of the register of deeds; (d) Posting in the property and the municipal hall of where the property is situated Answer: (c) Cadastral Registration This is almost similar to original registration except that the survey and the filing of the Petition is initiated by the government with the Director of Lands. Whereas, in original registration, it is the applicant himself. In procedure, this is almost the same. You have the Cadastral survey done by the government, notice of survey so that you can appear before the surveyor and point out the area that you are claiming, then publication, filing of petition, second publication, this time this is on the initial hearing of the petition, and judgment. Only unregistered lands maybe subject of cadastral survey, because once your land is registered under the Torrens system, no other court would have jurisdiction to register that land again. Cadastral survey is simply to identify and delineate the extent of the land. Its not proof of ownership. Remedies Available to aggrieved parties in Land Registration Proceedings (either ordinary/original or cadastral) Up to the decision, your remedies will only be one to three 1. Motion for Reconsideration/New Trial MR:error of law or misappreciation of evidence. MNT: fault, accident, mistake, excusable negligence. And that has to be filed within 30 days. 2. Appeal Upon denial of your MR or MNT, you appeal. Or you did not file MR/MNT, you can directly appeal. Also within 30 days of receipt. 3. Petition for Relief Actual and extrinsic fraud. You have to file this within 60 days from Notice and not more than 6 months from entry of the decision. These are the three (3) remedies that can be used by aggrieved parties to attack or assail the decision.

We shall discuss 4,5,6 later because 4,5,6 refers to the decree, so once the decision is final because tapos na lahat ng appeal and all these three (3) remedies are covered and there is an issuance of the decree then your remedy will be in 4, 5, 6. Also, once there is a decree, that presumes the decision is final. And this is another reason why you can no longer avail of 1, 2 and 3. III. Titles Certificate of Title is the evidence of ownership. Lands covered by title cannot be acquired by prescription or adverse possession because one of its qualities is imprescriptibility. MCQ: When does title become indefeasible? a) upon finality of the judgment of the land registration court b) upon issuance of the decree c) upon issuance of the certificate of title d) one year after the entry of the decree of registration Answer: (d). The general rule is the title to registered property becomes indefeasible after one year of the date of the registration, except if there is actual fraud. Date of registration = date of entry of the decree of registration. Registration in the sense of registering the decree and the issuance of the certificate of title. Even if a certificate of title is evidence of ownership and it is conclusive, imprescriptible, indivisible, in the following cases the certificate of title is void, because the properties are not registrable: 1. Where the land is part of mineral or forest reserve. It is based on the Regalian doctrine. There is no public land act that will allow you to acquire forest land. 2. Where land is part of government reservation, like military reservation, naval reservation. 3. Where land is part of navigable river bed. 4. Foreshore land - that is part of the land that is covered and uncovered by the action of the tide. 5. Reclaimed lands that are intended for public use (because it is no longer intended for public use then it is already within the commerce of man) 6. Where court which orders for the registration of land is without jurisdiction because the jurisdictional requirements are not complied with, like publication to official gazette, publication in newspaper of general circulation, and posting with municipal hall and on the land sought to be registered. 7. When the certificate of title was issued from a the void decree because the decree being issued was issued before the decision became final. In this case there was fast tracking, even before the decision became final, say on the 25th day somehow the land registration authority had issued a decree. The certificate of title that is issued from that decree is void.

8. When certificate of title is based on homestead or other patents which has issued over private land. If land is already private because somebody has been occupying that since June 12, 1945, then lets say in 2000, when that person is still occupying that land, the director of lands issues a homestead patent. And then that patent is registered and given an OCT. That OCT is void, because the director of lands only has authority in jurisdiction over public land NOT over private land. 9. Where the land is covered with previous title. That means land is already titled and there is another court that issues another title to that land. 10. Where the certificate of title is a forgery. Note here that what is a forgery is the certificate of title. It is not the deed of sale. (A forged deed can be a root of valid title). Ex. Case of Eagle Realty vs Republic. In this case De Leon applied for land registration of the land that he is claiming. After hearing, the decision comes out in favor of De Leon. The court then issues an order for issuance of a decree. Surprisingly there is another decision that comes out, apparently from the same court, purportedly from the same judge, on the same date, involving the same land, in the name of Medina. Then there is also an order for issuance of the decree sent to the land registration authority in the name of Medina. And therefore, a decree was issued in the name of Medina and once it was registered in the Registry of Deeds an original certificate of title was issued. Later De Leon finds out about this and writes a letter to the LRA asking what happened. Meanwhile, Medina exchanges this property (a 5.7 hectare property) in Paraaque for a 3,000 hectare property in Bulacan. The owner of that is a certain Reyes. As a result of the Deed of Exchange, OCT was cancelled and a TCT issued in favor of Reyes. Five (5) months later, Reyes sells the land (5.7 hectares) in Paraaque to Eagle Realty for 1.2 million pesos. The result of the letter of De Leon to the LRA who conducted the investigation shows that the decision in the name of Medina was fake, and that the order for the issuance of the decree is also fake. As a result of that letter, the Republic of the Philippines in behalf of the Director of Lands files action for declaration of nullity of the title of Eagle Realty. The first thing that Eagle Realty claimed was first, government is not the proper party to sue. It should be De Leon. So the Supreme Court said, government or the Republic in representation of the Director of Lands and the commissioner of the Land Registration Commission has the personality because they are asking for nullification of the title. Otherwise, the assurance fund will become liable. Second, according to Eagle Realty, more than one year had lapsed since the issuance of the decree. Supreme Court said, that certificate of title of registration is not a shield to fraud. Finally, Eagle Realty said, I am an innocent purchaser for value and therefore even if there is fraud I should be protected. Supreme Court said you never proved that you are innocent purchaser of value. There is a presumption for good faith but there is no presumption of innocent purchaser for value. The one who alleges should prove that he is an innocent purchaser for value. In this case, realty companies as well as banks have been required by the Supreme Court not only to rely on the certificate of title but to go back even behind the title to determine if there is any defect and they did not do so. And therefore, according to the Supreme Court, you did not investigate and the size of the property is big and there was haste in the transfer of these properties. All of these are indicia that should have aroused an ordinary proven person to investigate. You are not an

innocent purchaser for value. Titles were cancelled and the title was reverted back to De Leon. MCQ: Over which of the following can a certificate of title be validly issued? a. Deforested land b. Mangrove c. Public ____ Land d. Military reservation Answer: You can instantly rule out (d). What about (a)? No. if it is forest land, even if you cut down all the trees it is still forest land. (c) is outside of the commerce of man. That only leaves mangrove land. What is mangrove land? Supreme Court said Mangrove land are bushes and therefore that is subject for registration. Remedies available to Agreed Parties: (a decree exists - attacking decree/certificate of title) 4. Petition for Review (within one year) 4 Requisites: unlawful deprivation, through actual and extrinsic fraud, no innocent purchaser for value (IPV), filed within one year from issuance of decree. Only actual and extrinsic fraud will do. What is an IPV? Someone who buys property without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in such property and pays a full and fair price at the time of purchase. Presumption is that a buyer of Registered land is not aware of defects in title. But one who purchases unregistered land does so at his peril. One who acquires land w a pending notice of lis pendens is in bad faith because there is a notice. To be a purchaser in good faith it is not enough that the buyer examines the latest TCT. When the party has actual knowledge of facts and circumstances that would cause a reasonable and cautious man to make inquiry, relying on the face of the title is not enough. For example, when you buy land and someone else is on the land, you cannot just rely on the title. You need to find out why he is on the land. Is he just a squatter, or is he claiming rights and interests in the land? If you do not make that inquiry, you are not an IPV. A case in which the vendor sold the property w a vast area in a prime location should have made the buyer suspect, such as in the Eagle Realty case. It is a common practice in the real estate industry that an ocular inspection of the property is a safeguard that a cautious and prudent purchaser usually makes. Failing that, you are not an innocent purchaser. 5. Action for Reconveyance (after one year) One that seeks to transfer property wrongfully or fraudulently registered by another to its rightful and legal owner. Legal and Equitable remedy granted to the rightful owner of a land who has been wrongfully and erroneously registered in the name of another, for the purpose of compelling the latter to transfer or reconvey the land to him. In an Action for Reconveyance, the decree of registration is respected as incontrovertible, because it has been over one year. But what is sought is the transfer of the property wrongfully and erroneously registered in anothers name to the rightful owner or one who has a better right. Registration of property in ones name, whether by fraud or mistake, the real owner being another impresses upon the titles acquired the character of a constructive trust for the real owner. When a person is

deprived of land because of actual fraud of breach of trust, he may recover the land within 4 years from discovery of the fraud where there is need to annul the fraudulent deed. For example: 3 children of a deceased father. One of us, X, prepared an EJS, stating that he is the only heir. He does not say that he has 2 other brothers. Because of that the title is transferred from the father to him. Even after 1 year, can we recover the land from him? YES. Because there was actual fraud and also breach of trust. But this must be filed within 4 years from discovery of fraud, since there is need to annul the fraudulent deed. However, this can only apply if the property has NOT been transferred to an IPV. If there is no deed that is involved, and the land has been registered in the name of one because of fraud, can you still recover the land after one year? Ex. X files an application for registration of land. I am an adjacent landowner. On the way to the court for the initial hearing, X tells me do not go to court anymore, because I will not get any part of your property. I will respect the boundary line. So because of this, I did not attend the proceedings. Yun pala when he registers the land, he includes part of my land. A decision comes out, I am not aware. A decree comes out, a certificate comes out. 4 years later I find out he has actually covered part of my land. Can I recover that land from him? Definitely not under Petition for Review, since over 1 year. But I can file an Action for Reconveyance within 10 years because there is constructive trust since he defrauded me, I was prevented from having my day in court. This led me to believe that he was not claiming my land. Again, provided there is no IPV. Even if I find out after 10 years, can I recover? Yes, because I am in possession of that land, and what I can file is Petition to Quiet title, which is imprescriptible. This is only available to me because I am in possession, if not, I would have to file an Action for Reconveyance w/in 10 years. And finally, at any time if there is a breach of express trust (meaning we entered into a written trust), and I can therefore recover that land at anytime. Again, if no IPV. Actual Fraud means intentional deception practiced by means of misrepresentation or concealment of material fact. Constructive fraud is as act not done w an actual design to commit fraud, but nonetheless has detrimental effect on another person/public interest. What is important is only actual fraud. Extrinsic Fraud is that which prevents a party having his day in court, like in the earlier example. Intrinsic Fraud is fraudulent when pertaining to an issue involved in an action. Ex. if instead of telling me not to attend, I was able to attend, then he presents perjured testimony or falsified documents. That is Intrinsic. That is NOT a ground for reconveyance. What you should have done is file a MR or APPEAL the decision. Discovery of fraud or breach of trust (for purposes of counting prescriptive period) is deemed to take place from issuance of certificate of title because registration of real property is considered constructive notice to all. So you count the prescriptive periods from issuance of certificate of title. But there is one exception. In case there is a document w/c is falsified. 4 year period is from actual discovery, not issuance of certificate (fraud as means to transfer title as stated 3 paragraphs ago, not fraud or falsification in an action as mentioned in the paragraph above)

MCQ: (slide shown, not dictated). An action for reconveyance based on constructive trust prescribes in 10 years from the date the certificate of title is issued. 6. Action for Damages this is the only remedy if the property has been transferred to an IPV. This is against the person that defrauded you, or if he is insolvent, the assurance fund. Proceedings after original registration Amendment what is important here is that there is no serious controversy. For instance, you want to change your status from married to widowed in the title. Replacement of lost certificate if your copy was lost, you can ask for replacement. Reconstitution if original w Register of Deeds was lost or destroyed.

IV. Registration of Deeds Voluntary Dealings Act of registration is the operative act to convey the land insofar as third parties are concerned. So if I sell the land to her, that is valid only between the two of us. To affect a 3rd person, that deed of sale must be registered in the Register of Deeds and annotated on the title. This is constructive notice to all persons from the time of registration. Registration is not necessary for validity of a contract as between parties, because registration serves chiefly to bind third parties. Requirements: 1. Submit deed of sale, must be notarized 2. Present duplicate certificate 3. Present certificate authorizing registration (CAR) from BIR 4. Proof of payment of doc stamps from BIR 5. Proof of payment of real estate tax from local assessors office 6. Payment of fees - must be done in the proper registry in order to effect and bind the land. So if the land is registered, I cannot register the deed under 113 or under Act 3334. If I do that, its as if it was not registered. MCQ: The act of registration is the operative act. This means that the transfer and vesting of title is effected by: (a) execution of an instrument of transfer (b) the act of ownership of the land (c) the transfer of a valid title with the transferor

(d) the state, acting through the officer, the Registrar Answer: The key is the word effected. Who effects the registration? The Registrar. MCQ: A conveyance which is not registered is not binding on: (a) the buyer (b) the heirs of the buyer (c) third persons having actual notice (d) innocent third parties Answer: (d) Involuntary Dealings Attachment, Adverse Claim, Notice of Lis Pendens Adverse Claim Right of interest over registered land adverse to registered owner. Must arise subsequent to registration. The basis of adverse claim should be after registration. Why? Because if it was prior to registration, you should have opposed registration. Annotation of adverse claim is a measure to protect interest. It is a notice that you have claim on the land. It is only good for 30 days, however, remains valid even after 30 days as long as there is no petition for cancellation. Notice of Lis Pendens It is proper only in actions that affect title to land. If it is an action in personam, this does not apply. Collection case, this does not apply. Grounds to cancel: If purpose is to molest or when annotation is unnecessary to protect title or party who caused annotation. Notice of Lis Pendens is announcement to the world that the property is subject to litigation. It binds any prospective buyer to the outcome of the case. Order of cancellation of Lis Pendens, even if Lis Pendens not actually cancelled, terminates the effect of the notice, and makes buyers after the order purchasers in good faith. (vs. Adverse claim even if there is an Order, as long as the adverse claim has not been cancelled, it will affect third persons). Therefore, and order cancelling Lis Pendens is immediately executory. When are these (Adverse claim and Lis Pendens) effective? Once annotated in the day book or the primary entry book. Not necessarily behind the title. Once in the book, it affects third persons. * Double sale 1544 of civil code. When there are two deeds of sale over same property, not when one is an extrajudicial partition, kailangan parehong sale, then the first one who registers it in good faith is preferred. In absence of registration, the first possessor in good faith. In absence of that, buyer in good faith who presents oldest title. MCQ: X sells his lot covered by TCT to Y. Two months later, X sells it to Z. Who is preferred?

(a) Y because it was first sold to him (b) Z because he first took possession (c) Y because he registered the sale first (d) Z because he is the later sale Answer: (c) * Levy and execution vs Deed of Sale First to register will be preferred Does a forged deed of Sale transfer title? As a general rule, no. Except it can transfer title when an IPV intervenes. Ex. Owner has TCT 12345. He entrusts his title to his nephew since he is going abroad. In his absence the nephew forges a deed of sale, making it appear that the owner sold the land to him, then he registers the forged deed of sale, and gets TCT 23456 in his name. Then he sells the land to Y, who pays a fair price and obtains TCT 4567 in Ys name. Can the owner get back the land and his title from Y? NO! Because in the meantime, Y has obtained a valid title as an IPV. You might say this is not fair. But one of the characteristics of the Torrens system is it protects an IPV. An in this case, its really more the fault of the Owner for leaving the TCT with his nephew, who is not trustworthy. Youll note here that there are three titles. That is the chain of title. But if prior to registration of the title in the name of Y, the Owner arrives, the Owner can recover the land because the IPV has not yet registered the land in his name. A forged document can become the root of valid title if the property has already been transferred from the name of the owner to the name of the forger, and is then acquired by an IPV, who must get title in his name. If the title has already been transferred to the name of the forger, a person who deals w such registered property in good faith will acquire good title to the property from the forger. What if the Owner entrusts his TCT to the nephew, and the nephew, instead of forging, represents himself to be the owner? And then Y buys the property. In this case Y is negligent, because it is the duty of the buyer to make sure that the one selling the property to him is the actual registered owner. Conflicting titles when there are two conflicting titles covering the same land, prior title (earlier in date) prevails, unless it is defective. Dealings w Unregistered Land Registration of an instrument under this system shall be understood to be w out prejudice to a third party with a better right. 1544 does not apply. The one who is given priority is the one who has the older title. Registration cannot defeat older title No deed, conveyance, mortgage, lease, or other voluntary instrument affecting land not registered under the Torrens system shall be valid, except as between the parties thereto, unless such instrument shall have been recorded in the manner herein prescribed in the

office of the Register of Deeds for the province or city where the land lies. (Sec 113 of PD 1529) To Summarize: 1. Title becomes indefeasible one year after entry of decree of registration, except if there is actual fraud, because then you can question within 1 year (Petition for Review) or 10 years (reconveyance), unless Owner has possession of the property, then imprescriptible, UNLESS title is issued in favor of IPV 2. Whoever claims to be IPV must prove it. 3. There can be no IPV of land outside of commerce of man, or of land titled by court or office w out jurisdiction, or of land of public domain, or if title is fake.