THIRDDIVISION

[G.R.No.155394.February17,2005]

REPUBLICOFTHEPHILIPPINES,petitioner,vs.GREGORIO AGUNOY, SR.,

Et al., SPOUSES EDUARDO and ARCELITA MARQUEZ and RURAL
BANKOFGAPAN,NUEVAECIJA,respondents.
DECISION
GARCIA,J.:

Interplaying in this case are two (2) counterbalancing doctrines in the law of land titles:
one,thedoctrineoffrausetjusnunquamcohabitant,whichbasicallymeansthatnoonemay
[1]
enjoythefruitsoffraud, andtheother,thedoctrinethatafraudulenttitlemaybetherootof
[2]
validtitleinthenameofaninnocentbuyerforvalueandingoodfaith.
Invoking the first, petitioner Republic of the Philippines in this petition for review on
certiorariunderRule45oftheRulesofCourt,seekstonullifyandsetasidethedecisiondated
[3]
September26,2002 oftheCourtofAppealsinCAG.R.CVNo.55732,whichreversedan
earlierdecisionoftheRegionalTrialCourtatCabanatuanCity,Branch25,initsCivilCaseNo.
831AF, an action for cancellation of free patent, original certificate of title and derivative
transfer certificates of title, thereat filed by the petitioner against, among others, the herein
respondents.
Thefactsarewelllaidoutinthedecisionunderreview:
OnMay26,1958,GregorioAgunoy,Sr.filedhisapplicationforFreePatentNo.51414coveringtwo
parcelsoflandidentifiedasLotNos.1341and1342,Cad269,Sta.RosaCadastre,NuevaEcija,
containinganaggregateareaof18.6486hectareswiththeBureauofLands.OnJanuary18,1967,hewas
issuedFreePatentNo.314450bytheDirectorofLands.
OnFebruary6,1967,theRegisterofDeedsofNuevaEcijaregisteredFreePatentNo.314450andissued
thecorrespondingOriginalCertificateofTitle(OCT)No.P4522inthenameofGregorioAgunoy,Sr.
OnMarch10,1967,theheirsofEusebioPerez,representedbyFranciscaPerez,causedtheannotationon
thesaidOCTofanadverseclaimintheirfavoroveraportionof15.1593hectaresoftheproperty.
OnJuly30,1975,thesaidheirsofEusebioPerezfiledaformalprotestdocketedasB.L.ClaimNo.760
(n)withtheBureauofLandsallegingthatLot1341oftheSta.RosaCadastre,NuevaEcija,coveredby
OriginalCertificateofTitleNoP4522isidenticaltoLots1and2ofPlanPsu47200whichhadbeen
adjudicatedasprivatepropertyofsaidprotestantpursuanttoadecisionpromulgatedonOctober24,1960
bytheCourtofFirstInstanceofNuevaEcijainLandRegistrationCaseNo.430,LRCRecordsNo.
14876.

OnMay3,1976,thechiefoftheLegalDivision,BureauofLands,conductedaformalinvestigationand
ocularinspectionofthepremisesanditwasascertainedthatFreePatentNo.314450andits
correspondingOCTNo.P4522wereimproperlyandfraudulentlyissued(Records,p.78)
OnJuly31,1979,uponthedeathofthewifeofGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,theheirs,namelyGregorioSr.,
Tomas,Lilian,AngelitoandGregorio,Jr.,executedaDeedofExtrajudicialPartitionwithSaleinfavor
ofJoaquinSangabolforandinconsiderationofthesumofTwentyThousandPesos(P20,000.00).
TheOriginalCertificateofTitleNo.P4522wascancelledbytheRegisterofDeedsofNuevaEcijaand
TransferCertificateofTitle(TCT)No.166270wasissuedinfavoroftheaforenamedheirs.SaidTCT
No.166270wasagaincancelledbyreasonoftheconcurrentsaletoJoaquinSangabolinwhosefavor
TCTNo.NT166271wasissued.
OnAugust1,1979,JoaquinSangabolsoldanundividedportionofthree(3)hectaresoftheproperty
describedasLot1341inTCTNo.NT166271toFortunatoParaforandinconsiderationofthesumof
ThreeThousandFiveHundredPesos(3,500.00)
Thefollowingday,hesoldthepropertydescribedasLot1342inTCTNo.NT166271toVirginiaP.
JimenezforandinconsiderationofthesumofOneThousandFiveHundredPesos(P1,500.00)inwhose
favorTCTNo.N166287wasissued.
OnMay12,1980,theadverseclaimofFranciscaPerez,etal.annotatedatthebackoftheOCTwas
cancelledbytheRegisterofDeedsofNuevaEcija(ExhibitG).
OnJanuary16,1981,JoaquinSangabolsubdividedthepropertydescribedasLot1341inTCTNo.NT
166271intothreelotsdesignatedasLotNos.1341A,1341B,and1341CofplanPsd299875duly
approvedbytheLandRegistrationCommission.
TCTNo.NT166271wascancelledandTCTNo.NT168972coveringLotNo.1341Awasissuedto
spousesFortunatoParaandAraceliSena.TCTNos.NT168973andNT168974coveringLotNos.
1341Band1341CwereissuedinfavorofJoaquinSangabol.
OnJune15,1982,VirginiaP.JimenezsoldthepropertycoveredbyTCTNo.NT166287infavorof
spousesBlandinoandJosefinaA.SalvaCruzforElevenThousandFiveHundredPesos(P11,500.00)
whereTCTNo.174634wasissuedinfavorofsaidspouses.OnJune17,1982,JosefinaA.SalvaCruz
effectedthesubdivisionofthepropertyintothirteen(13)lotsdesignatedasLotNos.1342At01342M
aspersubdivisionplanPsd03004756therebycancelingTCTNo.NT174634andTCTNos.NT
174635to174647wereissuedinlieuthereof.
OnNovember2,1982,FortunatoPara,throughhisattorneyinfactGloriaBergonia,mortgagedthe
propertycoveredbyTCTNo.NT168972infavorofthePerpetualFinanceandInvestment,Inc.inthe
amountofOneHundredTwentyFiveThousandPesos(P125,000.00).Themortgagewasforeclosedand
thepropertywassoldatpublicauction.Thereafter,thecorrespondingcertificateofsalewasexecutedin
favorofPerpetualFinanceandCredit,Inc.
OnMarch3,1983,thepropertiescoveredbyTCTNos.NT174643andNT174644weremortgaged
withtheRuralBankofGapanforFortyThousandPesos(P40,000.00).OnFebruary25,1985,the
mortgagewaslikewiseforeclosedandthepropertiesweresoldatpublicauctioninfavorofthesaidbank.
OnDecember16,1986,JoaquinSangabolsoldthepropertycoveredbyTCTNo.NT168974toEduardo
R.DeeforandinconsiderationofthesumofOneHundredTwenty[Thousand]Pesos(P120,000.00).
Subsequently,TCTNo.NT168974wascancelledandTCTNo.196579wasissuedinthenameof

EduardoR.Dee.
OnJanuary5,1988,theheirsofRupertoPerez(oldestsonofEusebio),nowrepresentedbySabinaP.
Hernandez,filedasupplementalprotestallegingthat:
a)LotNos.1341and1342,Cad269oftheSta.RosaCadatrehavebeenexclusively
occupiedandcultivatedbythemandtheirimmediatepredecessorsininterestwhohave
introducedpermanentimprovementsthereonconsistingofirrigatedricelands,mango
trees,bamboogrovesandothercrops
b)GregorioAgunoy,Sr.neveroccupiedandcultivatedsaidparcelsoflandinthemanner
andfortheperiodrequiredbylaw
c)SaidparcelsoflandareidenticaltoLots1,3andaportionof87,674squaremetersofLot
4oftheamendedplan47200Amd.asshownbytherelocationsurveyconductedby
GeodeticEngineerDeograciasL.JavieronJuly29,1977
d)ThepatentandtitleissuedtoGregorioAgunoy,Sr.wereobtainedthroughfraudand
misrepresentation.(Recordspp.910)
TheBureauofLandsconductedanewaninvestigationandocularinspectionofLot1342,Cad.269of
Sta.RosaCadastre,NuevaEcija,andcameoutwiththefollowingfindings,towit:
a)Lot1342,Cad.269ofStaRosaCadastre,NuevaEcijaislocatedatBarangayImbunia
(formerlyMarawa),MunicipalityofJaen,NuevaEcija
b)SaidlotwasoriginallyregisteredintheOfficeoftheRegisterofDeedsofCabanatuan
CityonMay23,1914underOCTNo.125issuedinthenameofValerianoEspiritu,
pursuanttoDecreeNo.15733issuedonMay20,1914inLandRegistrationCaseNo.
9552
c)OnMay13,1952,saidpropertywasconveyedinfavorofIsaiasCarlosunderTCTNo.
11554andthelatterconveyedthesameinfavorofthespousesSantiagoMateoand
LeogardaJuliano
d)TCTNo.11554wascancelledandinlieuthereof,TCTNo.17471wasissuedinthename
ofSantiagoMateo.(Records,pp.1378)
OnMay10,1988,theChiefoftheLegalDivisionrecommendedtotheDirectorofLandsthatcourt
actionbeinstitutedforthecancellationofFreePatentNo.314450anditscorrespondingOriginal
CertificateofTitleNo.P4522inthenameGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,aswellasothersubsequenttransfer
certificatesoftitleissuedtherefrombasedontheforegoingfindings(Underscoringsupplied).
It was against the foregoing backdrop of events when, on May 24, 1990, in the Regional
TrialCourtatGapan,NuevaEcijapetitionerRepublicofthePhilippines,thrutheOfficeofthe
[4]
SolicitorGeneral,filedthecomplaint inthiscaseagainstseveraldefendants,amongwhom
arethehereinrespondentsGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,hischildren,thespousesEduardoDeeand
ArcelitaMarquezDeeandtheRuralBankofGapan,NuevaEcija.Initscomplaint,docketedas
CivilCaseNo.831AF,petitionerRepublicalleged,interalia,asfollows:
30.FreePatentNo.314450anditscorrespondingOriginalCertificateofTitleNo.P4522were

procuredbydefendantGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,throughfraud,deceitandmisrepresentationsincethe
propertyinquestion(Lots1341and1342)atthetimethepatentandthetitlewereissuedwasalready
adjudicatedasprivatepropertyoftheheirsofEusebioPerezandValerianoEspiritu,respectively.
Consequently,thethenBureauofLands,nowLandsManagementBureau,nolongerhadanyjurisdiction
andcontroloverthesame.xxxxxx.
31.ThefraudulentactsandmisrepresentationofdefendantGregorioAgunoy,Sr.hadmisledthethen
BureauofLandsinissuingsaidpatent.Sincethepropertyinquestionwasnolongeradisposablepublic
land,FreePatentNo.314450anditscorrespondingOriginalCertificateofTitleNo.P4522issuedto
defendantGregorioAgunoy,Sr.arenullandvoidandshouldbecancelled.Moreover,GregorioAgunoy,
Sr.hasnotoccupiedandcultivatedthelandinthemannerandforthelengthoftimerequiredbylaw
(C.A.141asamendedseealsoRA782)(Emphasissupplied),
andaccordinglyprayedforajudgment
1.DeclaringFreePatentNo.314450andthecorrespondingOriginalCertificateofTitleNo.P4522
inthenameofGregorioAgunoy,aswellasallothersubsequenttransfercertificatesoftitleemanating
therefrom,i.e.,TransferCertificatesofTitleNos.NT168972,NT168973,NT196579,NT174635to
NT174647(inclusive),includingallliensandencumbrancesannotatedthereon,nullandvoid
2.Orderingdefendantstosurrendertheirownersduplicatecopiesofallsubsequenttransfer
certificatesoftitleemanatingfromOriginalCertificateofTitleNo.P4522totheRegisterofDeedsof
NuevaEcija
3.DirectingtheRegisterofDeedsofNuevaEcijatocanceltheaforesaidcertificatesoftitle
4.Orderingdefendantsandallthoseclaimingunderthemtodesistfromexercisingorrepresenting
actsofownershipand/orpossessioninthepremises(Underscoringsupplied).
xxxxxxxxx
[5]
Eventually,inadecisiondatedSeptember9,1996, thetrialcourtrenderedjudgmentfor
theRepublic,thus:
PREMISESCONSIDERED,judgmentisherebyrenderedinfavoroftheplaintiffandagainstthe
defendantsasfollows:
1.DeclaringasnullandvoidFreePatentNo.314450andthecorrespondingOriginal
CertificateofTitleNo.P4522inthenameofGregorioAgunoy,aswellasallother
subsequenttransfercertificatesoftitlesemanatingtherefrom(TCTNos.NT166270,NT
166271,NT168972,NT168973,NT168974,NT166287andNT174634toNT
174647,inclusive,oftheRegistryofDeedsofNuevaEcija)includingallliensand
encumbrancesannotatedthereon
2.Orderingdefendantstosurrendertheirowner'sduplicatecopiesofallthesaidsubsequent
transfercertificatesoftitlesemanatingfromOriginalCertificateofTitleNo.P4522tothe
RegisterofDeedsofNuevaEcija,andorderingtheRegisterofDeedstocancelthe
aforesaidcertificatesoftitles
3.OrderingreversionofthepiecesoflandembracedinFreePatentNo.314450andOCT
No.P4522oftheRegistryofDeedsofNuevaEcija,tothemassofpublicdomainexcept

thepiecesoflandwhichwerealreadythesubjectoflandregistrationproceedings
4.Orderingthathenceforththedefendantsandallthoseclaimingunderthemtodesistfrom
disturbingtheownershipofthegovernmentoverthesaidpiecesofland,and
5.Topaycostsofsuits.
Forlackofevidence,thethirdpartycomplaintfiledbytheRuralBankofGapan,Inc.againstdefendants
SpousesBlandinoSalvaCruzandJosefinaSalvaCruzisherebydismissedwithoutpronouncementasto
costs.
SOORDERED(Underscoringsupplied).
Therefrom, the spouses Eduardo Dee and Arcelita MarquezDee and the Rural Bank of
Gapan,NuevaEcijawenttotheCourtofAppeals,whereattheirrecoursewasdocketedasCA
G.R.CVNo.55732.
[6]
As earlier stated herein, the appellate court, in a decision dated September 26, 2002,
reversedandsetasidetheappealeddecisionofthetrialcourt,towit:
WHEREFORE,premisesconsidered,theappealisGRANTEDandthedecisionofthetrialcourtis
REVERSEDandSETASIDE.Anewjudgmentisherebyrenderedtoreadasfollows:
1.DefendantGregorioAgunoy,Sr.isdeclaredtohavevalidlyandproperlyacquiredFreePatentNo.
314450andthecorrespondingOriginalCertificateofTitleNo.P4522overLotNos.1341and1342,
Cad269,Sta.RosaCadastre,NuevaEcijaand
2.ThetitleovertheportionofLotNo.1342,nowcoveredbyTCTNo.196579inthenameof
defendantsappellantsSpousesDeeislikewisedeclaredvalidforhavingacquiredingoodfaithandfor
value.
SOORDERED.
[7]
:

Hence,thisrecoursebythepetitioner,submittingforourresolutionthefollowingissues
I.

WHETHERORNOTTHECOURTOFAPPEALSERREDINDECLARINGTHATPETITIONERIS
NOTTHEREALPARTYININTERESTINTHISCASEANDTHATGREGORIOAGUNOY,SR.
HADVALIDLYACQUIREDFREEPATENTNO.314450ANDORIGINALCERTIFICATEOF
TITLENO.P4522OVERLOTNOS.1341AND1342,CAD.269,STA.ROSACADASTRE,NUEVA
ECIJA.
II.

WHETHERORNOTTHECOURTOFAPPEALSERREDINDECLARINGTHATTHETITLE
OVERTHEPORTIONOFLOTNO.1342,NOWCOVEREDBYTCTNO.196579INTHENAMES
OFRESPONDENTSSPOUSESEDUARDODEEANDARCELITAMARQUEZISVALIDFOR
HAVINGBEENACQUIREDINGOODFAITHANDFORVALUE.
WeDENY.

To begin with, we agree with the Court of Appeals that petitioner Republic is not the real
partyininterestinthiscase.
Basicitisinthelawofprocedurethateveryactionmustbeprosecutedordefendedinthe
nameoftherealpartyininterest,meaningthepartywhostandstobebenefitedorinjuredby
[8]
the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit, a procedural rule
reechoedinalonglineofcasesdecidedbythisCourt.Forsure,nottoolongago,inShipside,
[9]
Inc.vs.CourtofAppeals, citingearliercases,wewrote:
xxx.Consequently,theRepublicisnotarealpartyininterestanditmaynotinstitutetheinstantaction.
Normayitraisethedefenseofimprescriptibility,thesamebeingapplicableonlyincaseswherethe
governmentisapartyininterest.UnderSection2ofRule3ofthe1997RulesofCivilProcedure,"every
actionmustbeprosecutedordefendedinthenameoftherealpartyininterest."Toqualifyapersonto
bearealpartyininterestinwhosenameanactionmustbeprosecuted,hemustappeartobethepresent
realowneroftherightsoughttoenforced(PioneerInsurancev.CA,175SCRA668[1989]).Areal
partyininterestisthepartywhostandstobebenefitedorinjuredbythejudgmentinthesuit,ortheparty
entitledtotheavailsofthesuit.Andbyrealinterestismeantapresentsubstantialinterest,as
distinguishedfromamereexpectancy,orafuture,contingent,subordinateorconsequentialinterest.
The very complaint in this case, supra, filed by petitioner Republic before the trial court
unmistakably alleges that at the time Free Patent No. 31445 and its corresponding Original
CertificateofTitleNo.P45222wereissuedtoGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,thepropertyinquestion
(Lots1341and1342)xxxwasalreadyadjudicatedasprivatepropertyoftheheirsofEusebio
PerezandValerianoEspiritu,andthatatthattime,thepropertyinquestionwasnolonger
adisposablepublicland.Infact,inparagraph27(f)ofthesamecomplaint,petitionerfurther
alleged:
f)Furthermore,itwasfoundthatpriortotheissuanceofFreePatentNo.314450onJanuary18,
1967,Lot1341ofSta.RosaCadastre,NuevaEcija,whichwasoneofthetwo(2)parcelsoflandapplied
forbyGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,wasalreadythesubjectofanapplicationforregistrationfiledbytheheirs
ofEusebioPerezin1958beforetheCourtofFirstInstanceofNuevaEcija,docketedasLRCCaseNo.
430,LRCRecordNo.14876,andwhereinaDecisionwaspromulgatedonOctober24,1960adjudicating
Lots1and2ofPlanPsu47200asprivatepropertiesofsaidheirsclaimants.TheaforesaidDecisionwas
alreadyfinalandexecutoryatthetimethepatentwasissuedtodefendantGregorioAgunoy,Sr.(Except
fortheunderscoringonasprivateproperties,therestareofthepetitioneritself).
WiththeveryadmissionsbythepetitioneritselfinitsbasicpleadingthatLotsNo.1341and
1342arealreadyprivatepropertiesoftheheirsofEusebioPerezandValerianoEspiritu,and
are,therefore,nolongerdisposablepubliclandoverwhichthethenBureauofLands,now
LandsManagementBureau,nolongerhadanyjurisdictionandcontrol,wearesimplyata
losstounderstandhowpetitionerRepubliccanstillprofesstobetherealpartyininterestinthis
case,andinsiststhatthedisputedpropertiesarestillpartofthepublicdomain.Ifever,thereal
partyininterestcouldbenoneotherthantheheirsofEusebioPerezandValerianoEspiritu,but
certainlynotthepetitioner.
Then,too,itisstrikingtonotethatevenasthecomplaintisbasicallyoneforreversionof
private property to the mass of public domain, petitioner did not implead either the heirs of
EusebioPerezorthatofValerianoEspiritu.Withoutdoubt,ifourdecisionhereonweretobein
favor of petitioner, the real beneficiary thereof is not the State. And because, as no less
admittedbythepetitioner,thelandssubjectofthiscasearenolongerpartofthepublicdomain,

thenullificationofAgunoysFreePatentP314450andOCTNo.P4522wouldnotresultinthe
reversionofthelandssubjectthereoftothemassofpublicland.Andthegovernment,notbeing
therealpartyininterest,iswithoutpersonalitytoinstitutereversionproceedings.Soitisthatin
[10]
anearliercase,
wehadanoccasiontosay:
Thereisnomeritinpetitioners'contentionthatonlytheStatemaybringanactionforreconveyanceof
thelotsindispute.Toreiterate,Lot2344isaprivatepropertyinopen,continuous,exclusiveand
notoriouspossessionoftheSantiagofamily.Thenullificationofitsfreepatentandtitlewouldnot
thereforeresultinitsreversiontothepublicdomain.Hence,theState,representedbytheSolicitor
General,isnottherealpartyininterest.
We could have, at this point, already written finis to this decision. Nonetheless, for the
peace of mind of those concerned, we have opted to address the second issue raised in the
petition: whether the appellate court erred in declaring as valid for having been acquired for
valueandingoodfaiththetitleovertheportionofLotNo.1342,coveredbyTCTNo.196579in
thenameoftherespondentspousesEduardoDeeandArcelitaMarquezDee.
After sleeping for an unreasonably long period of time lasting for decades, the heirs of
EusebioPerezcanlongerdefeatthebetterrightarisingfromtheTorrenstitlesinthenamesof
thepresenttransfereesoftheproperties,unlessanduntilanyonesucceedsinovercomingthe
presumptionofgoodfaithinsecuringtheirrespectivetitles.
For one, even granting as true the petitioners allegation of a prior cadastral case LRC
Case No. 430, LRC Rec. No. 148 involving a portion of the lots subject of Agunoys Free
Patent,whereinadecisionwasallegedlypromulgatedonOctober24,1960infavoroftheheirs
ofEusebioPerez,whichdecision,accordingtopetitioner,wasalreadyfinalandexecutory,we
are greatly bothered by the fact that none of the heirs of Eusebio Perez could show having
exerted due diligence towards at least attempting to accomplish the registration of the
propertiesinvolvedinthesaidcadastralcase,whichproperties,accordingtopetitionerandthe
Perezes,areidenticaltoLotNos.1341and1342.Verily,werewetobelievetheallegationsof
theheirsofEusebioPerezintheirownprotestwiththeBureauofLandsdatedJuly30,1975,
[11]
thereisanexpressorderforregistrationinLRCCaseNo.430,asfollows:
WHEREFORE,decisionisherebyrenderedaffirmingtheorderofgeneraldefaultheretoforeentered
andorderingtheregistrationofLotsNos.1and2ofPlanPsu47200,situatedintheBarrioofMarawa,
MunicipalityofJaen,NuevaEcija,containingatotalareaof21.9284hectaresinthefollowingmanner:
xxxxxxxxx
FromasearlyasOctober24,1960,whentheaforequoteddecisioninLRCCaseNo.430
waspromulgated,toaslateasFebruary6,1967,whenOCTNo.P4522ofGregorioAgunoy,
Sr.wasissued,oraslumberlastingformorethansix(6)years,theheirsofEusebioPerezhad
numerousopportunitiestocausetheimplementationofthesaidregistrationorder.Inexplicably,
they let this chance passed by. Vigilantibus, sed non dormientibus, jura subveniunt, the law
[12]
aidsthevigilant,notthosewhosleepontheirrights.
Andspeakingofrights,onemaynot
[13]
sleeponarightwhileexpectingtopreserveitinitspristinepurity.
For another, Jose Mendigoria, Public Lands Inspector and Investigator of the Bureau of
[14]
Lands,madethefollowingremarksinhiscertificationdatedFebruary28,1966:

10.Remarks:AttachedheretoisthecertificationoftheClerkofCourtandtheRegisterofDeeds,
CabanatuanCityforreadyreferencesinconnectionwiththespeedyissuanceofpatentinfavorof
theapplicant.
ItisinformedinthisconnectionthatthesurveyclaimantsoftheseLots,1341forEusebioPerez
and1342forValencianoEspiritucouldnotbelocatedinthelocality.Thelotswerealready
abandonedbythemsothatintheyear1941,thepresentapplicanttookpossessionofthelandthru
histenants.
Countering the foregoing certification, petitioner Republic claims that a more recent
verification survey conducted on February 15, 1988 by Geodetic Engineer Melencio
Mangahas,alsooftheBureauofLands,revealsananomalyintheissuanceofAgunoy,Sr.s
FreePatentNo.314450.Again,wequotefrompetitionerscomplaint,particularlyparagraph27
(c)thereof,towit:
c)TheresultsoftheverificationsurveyconductedbyGeodeticEngineerMelencioMangahasofthe
BureauofLandsonFebruary15,1988onthepremisesconfirmedtheearlierfindingsofsaidOfficethat
Lot1341Cad.269ofSta.RosaCadastre,NuevaEcija,coveredbyFreePatentNo.314450andOCTNo.
P4522inthenameofGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,isidenticaltoLots1,3andaportionof87,674square
metersofLot4oftheamendedPlanPsu47200whichwassurveyedandapprovedonJanuary21,1966
inthenameofEusebioPerez.ItwasverifiedlikewisethatLot1341iswithinBarrioMarawa,Jaen,
NuevaEcija.
AsbetweentheFebruary28,1966certificationofJoseMendigoria,supra,whichledtothe
issuance of Agunoys OCT No. P4522 and numerous derivative titles descending therefrom,
andtheFebruary15,1988verificationsurveyofGeodeticEngineerMelencioMangahas,cited
intheaforequotedparagraphofpetitionerscomplaint,whichledtonothing,sufficeittoquote
[15]
hereinwhatthisCourthassaidinPEZAvs.Fernandez:
xxx.Indeed,theinevitableconsequencesoftheTorrenssystemoflandregistrationmustbeupheldin
ordertogivestabilitytoitandprovidefinalitytolanddisputes,
[16]
andinHeirsofBrusasvs.CourtofAppeals:
TherealpurposeoftheTorrensSystemoflandregistrationistoquiettitletolandandstopforeverany
questionastoitslegality.Onceatitleisregisteredtheownermayrestsecurewithoutthenecessityof
waitingintheportalsofthecourt,orsittingonthemiradordesucasa,toavoidthepossibilityoflosing
hisland.Indeed,titlesoverlandsundertheTorrenssystemshouldbegivenstabilityforonitgreatly
dependsthestabilityofthecountry'seconomy.Interestreipublicaeutsitfinislitium.
If at all, the discrepancy in the two (2) separate survey reports of Mendigoria and
Mangahas can only be imputable to either the past or more recent officials of the Bureau of
Lands.
Of course, we are well aware of the rule reiterated in Republic vs. Court of Appeals and
[17]
Santos,
that,generally,theStatecannotbeputinestoppelbythemistakesorerrorsofits
officialsoragents.Inthatverycase,however,citing31CJS675676,wewentfurtherbysaying

xxx.Nevertheless,thegovernmentmustnotbeallowedtodealdishonorablyorcapriciouslywithits

citizens,andmustnotplayanignoblepartordoashabbythingandsubjecttolimitationsxxx,the
doctrineofequitableestoppelmaybeinvokedagainstpublicauthoritiesaswellasagainstprivate
individuals
Inanyevent,theverificationsurveyconductedbyGeodeticEngineerMelencioMangahas
on February 15, 1988 came almost twentytwo (22) years after the February 28, 1966
certificationofJoseMendigoriamorethantwentyone(21)yearsaftertheissuanceofAgunoy
Sr.sFreePatentNo.314450onJanuary18,1967anditsregistrationasOriginalCertificateof
Title No. P4522 on February 6, 1967 and more than eight (8) years reckoned from July 31,
1979when,uponthedeathofthewifeofGregorioAgunoy,Sr.,theheirsexecutedaDeedof
ExtrajudicialPartitionwithSaleinfavorofJoaquinSangabol.Inthemeanwhile,forabouthalfa
decade thereafter, ownership over the properties transferred from one buyer to another, with
eachandeverytransfereeenjoyingthepresumptionofgoodfaith.Ifonlyonthisscorealone
thatthepresentpetitionmustfall.
Therecanbenodebateatallonpetitionerssubmissionthatnoamountoflegaltechnicality
may serve as a solid foundation for the enjoyment of the fruits of fraud. It is thus
understandablewhypetitionerchantsthedogmaoffrausetjusnunquamcohabitant.
[18]
Significantly, however, in the cases cited by petitioner Republic,
as well as in those
[19]
othercases
wherethedoctrineoffraus et jus nunquam cohabitant was applied against a
patentandtitleprocuredthrufraudormisrepresentation,wenotethatthelandcoveredthereby
iseitherapartoftheforestzonewhichisdefinitelynondisposable,asinAnimas,orthatsaid
patent and title are still in the name of the person who committed the fraud or
misrepresentation,asinAcot,Animas,Republicvs.CAandDelMundoandDirectorofLands
vs.Abanilla,etal.and,ineitherinstance,therewereyetnoinnocentthirdpartiesstandingin
theway.
Here,itbearsstressingthat,bypetitionersownjudicialadmission,thelotsindisputeare
nolongerpartofthepublicdomain,andtherearenumerousthird,fourth,fifthandmoreparties
holdingTorrenstitlesintheirfavorandenjoyingthepresumptionofgoodfaith.Thisbringsto
[20]
[21]
mindwhatwehavereechoedinPinovs.CourtofAppeals
andthecases
thereincited:
[E]venonthesuppositionthatthesalewasvoid,thegeneralrulethatthedirectresultofaprevious
illegalcontractcannotbevalid(onthetheorythatthespringcannotrisehigherthanitssource)cannot
applyhereforWeareconfrontedwiththefunctioningsoftheTorrensSystemofRegistration.The
doctrinetofollowissimpleenough:afraudulentorforgeddocumentofsalemaybecometheROOTofa
validtitleifthecertificateoftitlehasalreadybeentransferredfromthenameofthetrueownertothe
nameoftheforgerorthenameindicatedbytheforger.
Itisevenworseinthiscasebecausehere,thereisnoforgertospeakof.Theremarkof
Land Inspector Jose Mendigoria about the abandonment by Eusebio Perez and Valenciano
Espiritucannot,byitself,befraudulent.And,forallweknow,thatremarkmayeventurnoutto
bethetruth.Whatpetitionerperceivesasfraudmaybenothingmorethanthedifferencesof
professional opinions between Land Inspector Jose Mendigoria and Geodetic Engineer
MelencioMangahas.Butregardlessofwhobetweenthetwoiscorrect,thehardrealityisthat
thepropertiesinquestionarenolongerfloatingobjectsonaspringthatcannotrisehigherthan
itssource,astheyarenowverymuchashoreandfirmlystandingonthehighsolidgroundof
theTorrenssystemoflandregistration.
WHEREFORE,theassaileddecisionoftheCourtofAppealsisherebyAFFIRMEDandthis

petitionDENIED.
SOORDERED.
Panganiban,(Chairman),SandovalGutierrez,Corona,andCarpioMorales,JJ.,concur.
[1]

[2]
[3]

[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]

Acot,etal.v.Kempis,etal.,55OGNo.16,p.2907[1959]DirectorofLandsv.Abanilla,etal.,124SCRA358
[1983]Republicv.CAandDelMundo,183SCRA620[1990].
Cruzv.CourtofAppeals,281SCRA491[1997]Republicv.CourtofAppeals,306SCRA81[1999].
Penned by Associate Justice Eliezer R. de los Santos and concurred in by Associate Justices Roberto A.
BarriosandDaniloB.Pineofthe15thDivision.
Rollo,pp.6579.
Rollo,pp.81101.
Rollo,pp.3948.
PetitionersMemorandum,p.14Rollo,pp.171197.
Section2,Rule3,1997RulesofCivilProcedure.
352SCRA334[2001].

[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]

HeirsofSimplicioSantiagov.HeirsofMarianoSantiago,404SCRA193[2003].
Rollo,pp.5657.
Solivav.Villaba,417SCRA277[2003].
Alonsov.CebuCountryClub,417SCRA115[2003].
Exh.DAnnexC,PetitionRollo,pp.51.52.
358SCRA489,500[2001].
313SCRA176,183[1999].
301SCRA366[1999].
Acot,etal.v.Kempis,etal.,supra,note1Republicv.Animas,56SCRA499[1974].
Republicv.CAandDelMundo,supra,note,1DirectorofLandsv.Abanilla,etal.,supra,note1.
198SCRA434,445[1991].
Duranv.IAC,138SCRA489,494[1985]reiteratedinPhilippineNationalBankv.CourtofAppeals,187SCRA
735,741[1990].