Transactions Pending Original

Registration

May land be dealt with pending

registration?

Yes, Section 22 of PD

1529 allows land subject of

registration to be dealt
with after the filing of
the application and
before the issuance of
decree.

May land be dealt with pending

registration?
The interested party should submit to the

court the pertinent instruments

evidencing the transaction to be considered
in the final adjudication of the case.
In case of transfer of a portion of the
land, the corresponding subdivision plan,
approved by the Director of Lands, should
also be presented.

May land be registered in favor of a

total stranger?
Yes, it is clear from Section 22 of PD 1529

that the law expressly allows the land,

subject matter of an application for
registration, to be dealt with, i.e., to be
disposed of or encumbered.
Neither does it require that the buyer or
the person to whom the property has been
conveyed be a party to the case.
He may thus be a total stranger to the land
registration proceedings.

May land be registered in favor of a

total stranger?
The only requirements of the law are:
(1) that the instrument be presented to the

court by the interested party together

with a motion that the same be
considered in relation with the
application; and
(2) that prior notice be given to the parties to
the case.
(Mendoza v. Court of Appeals GR No.
L-36637, July 14, 1978, 84 SCRA 67)

Certificate of Title
Preparation of decree and Certificate of

Title
(Section 39 of PD 1527)
Upon finality of judgment:

Prepares the
Decree of
Registration

Original
Certificat
e of Title

Statement of personal circumstances in

the certificate (Section 45, PD 1529)
Every certificate of title shall contain the

following entries:
(a) full names of all persons whose interest
make up the full ownership in the land;
(b) civil status;
(c) names of their respective spouses, if
married;
(d) citizenship; and
(e) residence and postal address.

Entry of Original Certificate of Title

(Section 40, PD 1529)
Upon receipt by the Register of

Deeds of the original and duplicate

copies of the original certificate of
title the same shall be entered in
his record book and shall be
numbered, dated, signed and
sealed by the Register of Deeds
with the seal of his office.

Owners certificate of title

(Section 41, PD 1529)
The owners duplicate certificate of title shall be

delivered to the registered owner or his duly authorized

representative.
If 2 or more persons are registered owners, one
owners certificate may be issued for the whole land
if the co-owners so desire, a separate duplicate may be
issued to each of them in like form, but all outstanding
certificates of title so issued shall be surrendered
whenever the Register of Deeds shall register any
subsequent voluntary transaction affecting the whole
land or part thereof or any interest therein.
The Register of Deeds shall note on each certificate of
title a statement as to whom a copy thereof was issued.

Owners certificate of title

(Section 41, PD 1529)
A co-owner may not convey a physical portion of

the land owned in common. What a co-owner

may dispose of is only his undivided aliquot
share, which shall be limited to the portion
which
may be allotted to him upon the termination of
the co-ownership.
He has no right to divide the property into parts
and then convey one part by metes and bounds.
(Lopez v. Ilustre, GR No. L-14429, June 30, 1962, 5
Phil. 567)

Owners certificate of title

(Section 41, PD 1529)
Where several co-owners duplicate of

certificates of titles are issued, a

voluntary instrument cannot be
registered without surrendering all the
copies to the Register of Deeds so that
every copy of thereof would contain
identical entries of the transactions
affecting the land covered.
(Balbin vs ROD 28 SCRA 12)

Registration Books (Section 42,

PD 1529)
The original copy of the original

certificate of title shall be filed

in the Registry of Deeds.
The same shall be bound in
consecutive order together with
similar certificates of title and
shall constitute the registration
book for titled properties

Transfer Certificate of Title

(Section 43, PD 1529)

The transfer certificate of

title which may be issued

pursuant to any voluntary or
involuntary instrument shall
be in like form as the
original and titled Transfer
Certificate of Title.

General Rule
Where 2 or more certificates

cover the same land, the earlier

in date prevails.
Exception:
1. Anomalies, irregularities in the
certificate of title;
2. Mistake; or
3. Fraudulent registration.

Anomalies, irregularities in the

certificate of title
Should a buyer finds out that the land he

intends to buy is occupied by anybody else

other than the seller who is not in actual
possession, it would then be incumbent
upon the purchaser to verify the extent of
the occupants possessory rights.
Purchasers cannot close their eyes to facts
that should have put any reasonable
person upon guard, and then claim that
they acted in good faith under the belief
that there was no defect in the title.

Mistake
Where the inclusion of land in

the certificate of prior date is a

mistake, the mistake may be
rectified by holding the latter of
two certificates to be
conclusive.
(Legarda vs Saleeby, GR No.
8936, Oct. 2, 1915, 31 Phil. 590)

Fraudulent Registration
In the case of Widows and
Orphans, Inc. v. Court of
Appeals, GR No. 91797, a
certificate of title is not
conclusive where it is the
product of a faulty or
fraudulent registration.

Previous adjudication
When it is established that the same has
been registered in the name of two different
person the title should remain in the name of
the person securing the first registration."
This Court further held that " (T)he very
purpose of the Torrens System would be
destroyed if the same land may be
subsequently brought under a second action
for registration.(Republic vs CA, 83 SCRA
453)

Defective title vs
unblemished titile
Errors that relate to the lots' mother title,

their technical descriptions and their

locations cannot be dismissed as clerical
and harmless in character. With these
errors, the titles of the petitioners do not
deserve the sanctity given to torrens title.
Thus, these titles cannot be upheld against
the unblemished titles.
(Lorenzana vs CA, 231 SCRA 713)

Overlapping titles (Cambridge

Realty vs Eradinus Development)
A wall appears to have been built in the 1960s.
Previous owners of the respective lots did not

complain of its presence.

Now, the owners are complaining.
In one overlapping of boundaries case,the Court
held that a land owner may not now claim that
his property has been encroached upon when his
predecessor did not register any objections at the
time the monuments were being placed on the
claimed encroached area; nor did the latter make
any move to question the placement of said
monuments at the time.