DECREE OF REGISTRATION AND CERTIFICATE OF TITLE

A certificate of title issued pursuant to adminis- trative proceedings is as indefeasible as any title
DEGREE OF REGISTRATION issued through judicial proceedings provided the land is a disposable public land, and becomes
A decree of registration is an order issued under the signature of the LRA Administrator stating incontrovertible one year after the issuance of the patent. (Republic v. Carle, 105 Phil. 1227)
that the land is registered in the name of the applicant (or oppositor or claimant, as the case may
be). It shall bear the date, hour and minute of its entry. A certified copy of the decree is sent to A certificate of title based on an emancipation patent under PD No. 27 also enjoys the same
the RD for transcription in the “Registration Book.” protection as a certificate issued judicially or administratively. (Lonoy v. Sec. of Agrarian
Reform, R No. 175049, Nov. 27, 2008)
The certificate of title shall take effect upon the date of the entry of the decree. (Manotok Realty,
Inc. v. CLT Realty Development Corporation, GR No. 123346, Dec. 14, 2007) Title earlier in date prevails
 On the assumption that there was regularity in the registration leading to the
The decree of registration shall bind the land and quiet title thereto. It shall be conclusive against eventual issuance of subject transfer certificates of title, the better approach is to trace
all persons, including the government and its branches. (Sec. 31, PD 1529) the original certificates from which the certificates of title in dispute were derived.
Should there be only one common original certificate of title, . . ., the transfer certificate
Land becomes registered land only upon the transcription of the decree in the book of the issued on an earlier date along the line must prevail, absent any anomaly or irregularity
Register of Deeds, and not on the date of the issuance of the decree. (Manotok v. CLT Realty, tainting the process of registration. (Top Management Programs Corp. v. Fajardo, GR
supra) No.150462, June 15, 2011)

A court has no jurisdiction to decree again land already decreed in a prior case. (Laburada v. STATUTORY LIENS AFFECTING REGISTERED LAND
LRA, 287 SCRA 333), otherwise that constitutes a collateral attack on the existing title. (SM Every registered owner holds title free from encumbrances except: (a) liens or rights not required
Prime Holdings v. Madayag, 578 SCRA 552) by law to be registered (b) unpaid real estate taxes (c) public highway (d) limitation on the use of
property under agrarian reform and public land laws (e) liability to attachment or levy on
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE execution (f) taking under eminent domain proceedings. (Sec. 44, PD No. 1529)
Issuance of decree and certificate of title • Purpose: to give the registered owner an absolutely clean title, not
 Within 15 days from entry of the judgment, the court shall direct the LRA Administrator subject to hidden defects or inchoate claims, as well as restrictions except those
to issue the decree of registration and prepare the original and duplicate certificate of appearing in the certificate or imposed by the law.
title based thereon. The original certificate of title, signed by him, shall be a true copy of
the decree, and shall be sent, together with the owner’s duplicate, to the Register of The decree does not relieve the land or the registered owner from any rights incident to:
Deeds of the city or province where the land lies. (Sec. 39, PD 1529)  The relation of husband and wife, landlord and tenant;
 The certificate is an indefeasible evidence of ownership of the person whose name  From liability to attachment or levy on execution;
appears therein. (Panganiban v. Dayrit, 464 SCRA 370).  From liability to any lien of any description established by law on the land
and buildings thereon; or
Contents of a certificate of title  Change the laws of descent, rights of partition, or right to take the same by
 Every certificate of title shall set forth the full names of the registered owners and their eminent domain; or
status. If the property belongs to the conjugal partnership, it shall be issued in the names  Relieve such land from liability to any assignee in insolvency or bankruptcy;
of both spouses. or
 All property of the marriage is presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership, unless it  Change or affect other rights or liabilities created by law (Sec. 46, PD 1529)
be proved that it pertains exclusively to the husband or to the wife. (Art. 160, CC)
 When the property is registered in the name of a spouse only and there is no showing as VOLUNTARY DEALINGS WITH REGISTERED LAND
to when the property was acquired, this indicates that the property belongs exclusively Voluntary dealings with registered lands
to said spouse. The presumption in Art. 160 does not apply in that case especially where  Any registered owner may convey, mortgage, lease or otherwise deal with
the rights of innocent third parties are involved. (PNB v, Vitug, 153 SCRA 435) the land. (Sec. 51. PD No. 1529).
 Every conveyance or disposition of registered land, if registered, is
constructive notice to all persons from the time of registration. (Sec. 52, PD 1529;
A certificate of title may be an original certificate of title, which constitutes a true copy of the Guaranteed Homes v. Valdez, 577 SCA 441)
decree of registration, or a transfer certificate of title, issued subsequent to original registration.  But knowledge of an unregistered sale is equivalent to registration.
The title serves as evidence of an indefeasible and incontrovertible title one year after the (Fernandez v. CA, 189 SCRA 780)
issuance of the decree of registration by the LRA. (Del Prado v. Caballero, GR No. 148225,
March 3, 2010)
Contracts are obligatory in whatever form provided the essential requisites of consent, object and
A person dealing with registered land need not go beyond, but only has to rely on, the title of his cause of the obligation is established.
predecessor. (Guaranteed Homes v. Valdez, 577 SCRA 441)
  Donation of real property must be in a public instrument to be valid. For a mortgage to  Involuntary registration – registration is complete upon filing and entry of
be validly constituted, the document must be recorded. the order (e.g., of attachment, levy upon execution, notice or lis pendens, etc.) in the day
 Agreements mentioned in the Statute of Frauds, to be enforceable, must be in writing book of the RD, without need of presenting the owner’s duplicate.
and subscribed by the party charged.
 Sale of real estate is valid regardless of form but is effective against third persons only In voluntary registration, such as a sale, mortgage, lease and the like,
from date of registration.  if the owner's duplicate certificate be not surrendered and presented, or
 if no payment of registration fees be made within fifteen (15) days,
Between two transactions concerning the same land, the registered transaction prevails over the  entry in the day book of the deed of sale does not operate to convey and
earlier unregistered right. affect the land sold.

 Thus, where a purchaser files an adverse claim to registered land only after In involuntary registration, such as an attachment, levy upon execution, lis pendens and the like,
the same was already mortgaged to the bank, upon the claim that he bought the land entry thereof in the day book is a sufficient notice to all persons of such adverse claim. (Bulaong
“long before” the mortgage, the right of the bank to the property is superior to that of the v. Gonzales, GR No. 156318, Sept. 5, 2011)
purchaser. (Unchuan v. CA, 161 SCA 710)
 If two certificates of title purport to include the same land, the better REPLACEMENT OF LOST OF DESTROYED CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
approach is to trace the original certificates from which the certificates of titles were Upon petition of the registered owner or person in interest, the court may, after notice and
derived. (Bangis v. Adolfo, GR No. 190875, June 13, 2012) hearing, direct the issuance of a new duplicate certificate which shall in all respects be entitled to
like faith and credit as the original duplicate. (Sec. 109, PD No. 1529)
Rule in case of sale of conjugal property
 Under Art. 124 of the Family Code, the sale of conjugal property requires Where the owner’s duplicate copy is not in fact lost or destroyed, a petition for the purpose is
the consent of both husband and wife. unwarranted as the court has no jurisdiction over the petition
 The absence of consent of one renders the sale null and void,
including the portion pertaining to the spouse who contracted the sale. (Guiang Procedure
v. Court of Appeals, 353 Phil. 578)  The registered owner or person in interest shall send notice, under oath, of
 Under Art. 173 of the Civil Code, the disposition of conjugal property without the wife’s the loss or destruction of the owner’s duplicate certificate to the Register of Deeds; and
consent is not void but merely voidable, and the wife may within 10 years ask the court  The corresponding petition for the replacement of the lost or destroyed
for the annulment of the contract. certificate shall then be filed in court and entitled in the original case in which the
decree of registration was entered.
Art. 161 of the Civil Code provides that the conjugal partnership shall be liable for debts and  Unlike in a petition for reconstitution, there is no requirement for the
obligations contracted by the wife for the benefit of the conjugal partnership. (Alfredo v. Borras, publication of the petition for replacement of a lost or destroyed certificate .
404 SCRA 145)
 In a contract of sale, title to the property passes to the vendee upon delivery REGISTERED LAND NOT SUBJECT TO COLATERRAL ATTACK
of the thing sold; in a contract to sell, ownership is, by agreement, reserved in the vendor A certificate of title cannot be altered, modified or cancelled except in a direct proceeding filed
and is not to pass to the vendee until full payment of the purchase price. with the RTC (Sec. 48, PD 1529; Manotok v. Barque, 582 SCRA 583)
 Sale of real property in a public instrument is equivalent to the delivery
thereof if the contrary does not appear. Direct attack: when the object of the action is to annul or set aside the judgment, or enjoin its
Dacion en pago is the delivery and transmission of ownership of a thing by the debtor to the enforcement.
creditor as an accepted equivalent of the performance of t he obligation.
Collateral attack: in an action to obtain a different relief, an attack on the judgment is
Registration in the public registry is notice to the whole world. nevertheless made as an incident thereto.

Knowledge of an unregistered sale is equivalent to registration. (Fernandez v. CA, 189 SCRA A direct attack on title is proper in a counterclaim (Leyson v. Bontuyan, 452 SCRA 94).
780)
Collateral attack, illustrative cases
Between two transactions concerning the same land, the registered transaction prevails over the  Director of Lands v. Gan Tan (89 Phil. 184) - where the decision of the
earlier unregistered right. (Fudot v. Cattleya, 533 SCRA 350) lower court denying reconstitution because petitioner is allegedly an alien was
reversed, the Supreme Court holding that the issue is a collateral attack on the title and
VOLUNTARY AND INVOLUNTARY REGISTRATION should be raised only a direct action.
Voluntary and involuntary registration distinguished  Oño v. Lim (614 SCRA 514) – where it was held that there is no collateral
 Voluntary registration – the purchaser becomes the registered owner upon attack when respondent asserted that the title in the name of petitioner’s predecessor
the filing and entry of the deed sale in the day book, and the surrender of the owner’s had become inoperative due to the prior conveyance of the land in favor of
duplicate certificate of title to the RD. respondent’s mother.
  “When the person applying for the loan is other than the registered owner of the real
Manotok v. Barque, GR No. 162335, Dec.18, 2008 property being mortgaged, [such fact] should have already induced the Bank to make
 Section 48 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, also known as the Property inquiries into and confirm [the] authority to mortgage . . . . A person who deliberately
Registration Decree, provides that "[a] certificate of title shall not be subject to ignores a significant fact that could create suspicion in an otherwise reasonable person
collateral attack [. . . and] cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled except in a direct is not an innocent purchaser for value.” (Citing Bank of Commerce v. San Pablo, GR
proceeding in accordance with law". Clearly, the cancellation of the Manotok title No. 167848, 27 April 2007)
cannot arise incidentally from the administrative proceeding for reconstitution of the
Barque title even if the evidence from that proceeding revealed the Manotok title as Acts showing the bank’s lack of diligence
fake. Nor could it have emerged incidentally in the appellate review of the LRA's  Where the bank did not investigate the property to ascertain its actual occupants. (It is
administrative proceeding. the standard practice of banks, before approving a loan, to send representatives to the
premises of the land to investigate its real owners)
SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION  Where the bank’s representative concentrated only on the appraisal of the property
Innocent purchaser for value and failed to inquire as to who were the then occupants of the property.
 An innocent purchaser for value is one who buys the property of another  Where the bank acted with haste in granting the mortgage loan and did not ascertain
without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in it, and who pays a the ownership of the land being mortgaged, as well as the authority of the supposed
full and fair price at the time of the purchase or before receiving any notice of another agent executing the mortgage. (LBP v. Poblete, supra)
person’s claim. (Yared v. Tiongco, GR No. 161360, Oct. 19, 2011; Rosales v. Burgos,
577 SCA 264) Every person dealing with registered land has a right to rely on the correctness of the title and is
 No petition for review shall be entertained by the court where an innocent not obliged to go beyond the certificate to determine the condition of the property. (Unchuan v.
purchaser for value has acquired the land or an interest therein. (Sec. 32, PD 1529) CA, 161 SCRA 710)
 But one who buys from one who is not the registered owner is expected to examine
“Innocent purchaser for value” includes innocent mortgagee not only the certificate of title but all factual circumstances necessary to determine if
 The phrase “innocent purchaser for value” in Sec. 32 of the Property Registration there are any flaws in the title of the transferor. (Cabigas v. Limbaco, GR No. 175291,
Decree includes an innocent lessee, mortgagee, or other encumbrancer for value. July 27, 2011)
(Unchuan v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 78775, May 31, 1988, 161 SCA 710)  In a series of transfers, it is enough that the buyer examines the latest certificate of title
 Good faith, or the lack of it, is a question of intention. In ascertaining intention, courts and need not scrutinize each and every title that preceded it. (Tajonera v. CA, 103
are necessarily controlled by the evidence as to the conduct and outward acts by which SCRA 467)
alone the inward motive may, with safety, be determined. (LBP v. Poblete, GR No.  But under the rule of caveat emptor (buyer beware), one who buys without checking
196577, Feb. 25, 2013) the vendor’s title takes all the risks and losses consequent to such failure. (Dacasin v.
CA, 80 SCRA 89)
Doctrine of “mortgagee in good faith”  A mortgage is invalid even in the hands of an innocent mortgagee where the title
 In LBP v. Poblete, GR No. 196577, Feb. 25, 2013, the Court explained the covers non-registrable land. (LBP v. Republic,543 SCRA 453)
doctrine of “mortgagee in good faith" as one based on the rule that buyers or
mortgagees dealing with property covered by a Torrens certificate of title are not In Cusi v. Domingo, GR No. 195825, Feb. 27, 2013, the Court held:
required to go beyond what appears on the face of the title.  Under the Torrens system of land registration, the registered owner of realty cannot be
 Thus, despite the fact that the mortgagor is not the owner of the mortgaged deprived of her property through fraud, unless a transferee acquires the property as an
property, his title being fraudulent, the mortgage contract and any foreclosure sale innocent purchaser for value.
arising therefrom are given effect by reason of public policy.  But a transferee who acquires the property covered by a reissued owner's copy of the
certificate of title without taking the ordinary precautions of honest persons in doing
But doctrine of “morgagee in good faith” not applicable to banks business and examining the records of the proper Registry of Deeds, or who fails to
 It has been consistently held that the rule does not apply to banks, which are required pay the full market value of the property is not considered an innocent purchaser for
to observe a higher standard of diligence. A bank whose business is impressed with value.
public interest is expected to exercise more care and prudence in its dealings than a
private individual, even in cases involving registered lands. A bank cannot assume Nemo dat quod non habet
that, simply because the title offered as security is on its face free of any encumbrances  No one can give what one does not have.
or lien, it is relieved of the responsibility of taking further steps to verify the title and  One can sell only what one owns or is authorized to sell, and the buyer can acquire no
inspect the properties to be mortgaged. (LBP v. Poblete, supra) more than what the seller can transfer legally.
 In LBP v. Poblete, supra, the Court held that LBP is not a mortgagee in good faith Prior est temporae, prior est in jura
because it processed Maniego’s application upon presentation of OCT No. P-12026,  He who is first in right is preferred in right.
which was still in the name of Poblete. It also ignored the fact that a certain Kapantay  Thus, when the thing sold is an immovable, the one who acquires it and first
had previously used Poblete's title as collateral in its loan account with LBP. records it in the Registry of Property, both made in good faith, shall be deemed the
owner.
  For then the vendee had the right to rely upon what appeared in the
A certificate of title is not conclusive where it is the product of faulty or fraudulent registration. certificate. (Guaranteed Homes v. Valdez, 577 SCRA 441)
(Widows and Orphans Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 201 SCRA 165)
General Incidents of Registered Land
Where the inclusion of land in the certificate of prior date is a mistake, the mistake may be  “Every registered owner receiving a certificate of title in pursuance of a decree of
rectified by holding the latter of two certificates to be conclusive. (Legarda v. Saleeby, 31 Phil. registration, and every subsequent purchaser of registered land taking a certificate of
590) title for value and in good faith, shall hold the same free from all encumbrances except
those noted in said certificate.” (Sec. 44, PD 1529)
The rule that where two certificates purport to include the same land, the earlier in date prevails,  The phrase “innocent purchaser for value” includes an innocent lessee, mortgagee, or
is valid only absent any anomaly or irregularity tainting the process of registration. (Mathay v. other encumbrancer for value. (Unchuan v. CA, 161 SCRA 710)
Court of Appeals, 295 SCRA 556)
Statutory liens
Under Sec. 32, PD No. 1529, rule of good faith equally applies to mortgagees or other  Every registered owner and every subsequent purchaser for value and in
encumbrancers for value good faith shall hold the same free from all encumbrances (Casimiro Development
 Thus, where the Torrens title was issued through regular registration proceedings, a Corp. v. Mateo, GR No. 175485, July 27, 2011) except those noted in the certificate
subsequent order for the cancellation nullification of the title is not a ground for and any of the following:
nullifying the mortgage rights of the bank. (St. Dominic v. IAC, 151 SCRA 577)  liens, claims or rights under the Constitution and laws; unpaid real
 The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee must be respected even if the mortgagor estate taxes; any public highway or private way established by law; any
obtained his title through fraud. (Blanco v. Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494) disposition of the property or limitation on the use thereof by virtue of PD 27 or
any law on agrarian reform. (Sec. 44, PD 1529)
PNB v. CA and Chu Kim Kit, GR No. L-43972, July 24, 1990
 "The certificate of title was in the name of the mortgagor when the land was Meaning of lien, encumbrance
mortgaged to the PNB. Such being the case, petitioner PNB had the right to rely on • “Lien” is a charge on property usually for the payment of some debt or
what appeared on the certificate of title, and in the absence of anything to excite obligation. It signifies a legal claim or charge on property, either real or personal, as a
suspicion, it was under no obligation to look beyond the certificate and investigate the collateral or security for the payment of some debt or obligation.
title of the mortgagor appearing on the face of the certificate." (Citing Gonzales vs. • “Encumbrance” is a burden upon land depreciative of its value, such as a
Intermediate Appellate Court, 157 SCRA 587; Phil. Coop. Bank vs. Carangdang, 139 lien, easement, or servitude, which, though adverse to the interest of the landowner,
SCRA 570; Penullar vs. PNB, 120 SCRA 171) does not conflict with his conveyance of the land in fee, e.g., a mortgage, judgment
lien, lease, security interest, easement or right of way, accrued and unpaid taxes.
"The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee for value upon the land mortgaged must be respected
and protected, even if the mortgagor obtained his title through fraud. The remedy of the persons RECONSTITUTION OF ORIGINAL CERTITICATE OF TITLE & RECONSTITUTION OF
prejudiced is to bring an action for damages against those who caused the fraud, and if the latter OWNER’S DUPLICATE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
are insolvent, an action against the Treasurer of the Philippines may be filed for recovery of
damages against the Assurance Fund.“ (Citing Blanco v. Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494) The reconstitution of a certificate of title denotes restoration in the original form and condition
of a lost or destroyed instrument attesting the title of a person to a piece of land.
Forged deed is a nullity  The purpose of the reconstitution of title is to have, after observing the procedures
 Generally, a forged deed is a nullity and conveys no title, even if prescribed by law, the title reproduced in exactly the same way it has been when the
accompanied by the owner’s duplicate certificate of title. (Joaquin v. Madrid, 106 Phil. loss or destruction occurred.
1060)  RA 26 presupposes that the property whose title is sought to be reconstituted has
 The registered owner does not lose his title, and neither does the assignee or already been brought under the provisions of the Torrens System. (Republic v.
mortgagee acquire any right to the property. (Bernales v. Sambaan, 610 SCRA 90) Tuastumban, GR No. 173210, Apri 24, 2009)
 The innocent purchaser for value protected by law is one who purchases a
titled land by a virtue of a deed executed by the registered owner himself, not by a The lost or destroyed document referred to is the one that is in the custody of the Register of
forged deed. Deeds. When reconstitution is ordered, this document is replaced with a new one — the
reconstituted title — that basically reproduces the original.
But a forged deed may become the root of a valid title
 A forged deed may become the root of a valid title in a bona fide purchaser After the reconstitution, the owner is issued a duplicate copy of the reconstituted title. (Sec. 1,
if the certificate has already been transferred from the name of the true owner to the RA No. 26; Republic v. Vergel de Dios, GR No. 170459, Feb. 9, 2011)
name of the forger or the name indicated by the forger, and while it remained that way,
the land was subsequently sold to an innocent purchaser for value. (Solivel v. Requisites:
Francisco, 170 SCRA 218)  that the certificate of title had been lost or destroyed;
  that the documents presented by petitioner are sufficient and proper to warrant  The term "any other document" in paragraph (f) refers to reliable documents of the
reconstitution of the lost or destroyed certificate of title; kind described in the preceding enumerations and that the documents referred to in
 that the petitioner is the registered owner of the property or had an interest therein; Section 2 (f) may be resorted to only in the absence of the preceding documents in the
 that the certificate of title was in force at the time it was lost and destroyed; and list.
 that the description, area and boundaries of the property are substantially the same as  The party praying for the reconstitution of a title must show that he had, in fact, sought
those contained in the lost or destroyed certificate of title. (Id.) to secure such documents and failed to find them before presentation of "other
documents" as evidence in substitution is allowed. (Republic v. Lorenzo, GR No.
Judicial reconstitution partakes of a land registration proceeding and is subject to the 172338, Dec. 10, 2012)
jurisdictional requirements of publication, mailing and posting. This is mandatory. (Sec. 13, RA
No. 26; Pinote v. Dulay, GR No. 56694, July 2, 1990) The non-compliance with the requirements prescribed in Sections 12 (contents of petition) and
13 (requirements of notice and hearing) of R.A. No. 26 is fatal.
The petition shall be filed with the regional trial court of the province or city where the land lies.  These requirements and procedure are mandatory. The petition for
Sec. 108 of PD 1529 provides that all petitions or motions after original registration shall be reconstitution must allege certain specific jurisdictional facts; the notice of hearing
filed and entitled in the original case in which the decree of registration was entered. (See also must be published in the Official Gazette and posted in particular places and the same
Sec. 2, RA No. 26. Office of the Court Administrator v. Matas, A.M. No. RTJ-92-836. August sent or notified to specified persons. Sections 12 and 13 of the Act provide specifically
2, 1995). the mandatory requirements and procedure to be followed. (Castillo v. Republic, GR
No. 182980, Jun 22, 2011. See also: Republic v. Domingo, GR No. 197315, Oct. 10,
In Manotok v. Barque, (supra), the Court held that if it appears that the subject property is 2012)
already covered by an existing Torrens title in the name of another person, the LRA should
dismiss the petition. The dismissal is subject to judicial review, but the only inquiry in such Examples of incompetent proof
appellate proceeding is on whether or not there is a previously existing title covering the land. • A survey plan, technical description, certification issued by the LRA, lot data
computation, and tax declarations (which are not similar to those mentioned in
Neither the LRA nor the CA at that point may inquire into the validity of the title or the subparagraphs (a) to (e) of Sec. 2 of RA 26, as pertaining to documents issued or are
competing claims over the property. The only remedy is an action before the RTC for the on file with the Registry of Deeds).
cancellation of the existing title, whether by the competing claimant or by the OSG on behalf of • A survey plan and technical description (where the petition is based on Sec. 2 (f) of
the Republic. RA 26) which are mere additional documentary requirements.
• A certification that Decree No. 190622 was issued for Lot 54, without stating the
The cancellation of the previous (Manotok) title cannot arise incidentally from the number and date of the title, and to whom issued.
administrative proceeding for reconstitution of the Barque title even if the evidence from that • A tax declaration (which is not a reliable document). (Republic v. Ramos, GR No.
proceeding revealed the Manotok title as fake. Nor could it have emerged incidentally in the 169481, Feb. 22, 2010)
appellate review of the LRA's administrative proceeding. Sec. 48 of PD 1529 provides that "[a]
certificate of title shall not be subject to collateral attack [. . . and] cannot be altered, modified, or Liberal construction of the Rules of Court does not apply to land registration cases. Indeed, to
cancelled except in a direct proceeding in accordance with law". further underscore the mandatory character of these jurisdictional requirements, the Rules of
Court do not apply to land registration cases. (Sec. 4, Rule 1 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Neither the CA nor the LRA has the power to cancel titles. (Manotok v. Barque, supra) Procedure)

But there is no collateral attack on the title (OCT No. 239) when the reconstution case (LRC In all cases where the authority of the courts to proceed is conferred by a statute, and when the
Case No. B-1784) was dismissed by court precisely because the invalidity of said certificate of manner of obtaining jurisdiction is prescribed by a statute, the mode of proceeding is mandatory,
title was already determined with finality by the Supreme Court. and must be strictly complied with, or the proceeding will be utterly void. When the trial court
lacks jurisdiction to take cognizance of a case, it lacks authority over the whole case and all its
The decision of the Court declaring OCT No. 239 as fake, forged, and spurious already bars the aspects. (Castillo v. Republic, GR No. 182980, June 22, 2011)
reconstitution of said title under the doctrine of res judicata, in the concept of conclusiveness of
judgment. (Layos v. Fil-Estate, GR No. 150470, Aug. 6, 2008) Republic v. Lorenzo, GR No. 172338, Dec. 10, 2012
 “This Court has reiterated time and again that the absence of opposition from
Sources of reconstitution government agencies is of no controlling significance because the State cannot be
 Sec. 2, RA No. 26 - for reconstitution of an original certificate of title estopped by the omission, mistake or error of its officials or agents. Neither is the
 Sec. 3, RA No. 26 – for reconstitution of a transfer certificate of title. Republic barred from assailing the decision granting the petition for reconstitution if,
 “Any other document” as a source of reconstitution refers to documents on the basis of the law and the evidence on record, such petition has no merit.”
similar to those previously enumerated in the law under the principle of ejusdem
generis. (Republic v. IAC and Kiram, 157 SCRA 62 As held in Republic v. Lorenzo, GR No. 172338, Dec. 10, 2012, the following must be shown:
 that the certificate of title had been lost or destroyed;
Meaning of “any other document”
  that the documents presented by petitioner are sufficient and proper to warrant In involuntary registration, such as an attachment, levy upon execution, lis pendens and
reconstitution of the lost or destroyed certificate of title; the like, entry thereof in the day book is a sufficient notice to all persons of such
 that the petitioner is the registered owner of the property or had an interest therein; adverse claim. (Bulaong v. Gonzales, GR No. 156318, Sept. 5, 2011)
 that the certificate of title was in force at the time it was lost or destroyed; and
 that the description, area and boundaries of the property are substantially the same and Mortgage lien follows the property mortgaged
those contained in the lost or destroyed certificate of title. Any lien annotated on the previous certificates of title which subsists should be
incorporated in or carried over to the new transfer certificates of title. This is true even
Administrtative reconstitution of lost or destroyed certificates is governed by RA 6732. in the case of a real estate mortgage because pursuant to Art. 2126 of the Civil Code it
 It is available in case of substantial loss or destruction of land titles due fire, flood or directly and immediately subjects the property upon which it is imposed, whoever the
other force majeure. Manotok v. Barque, GR No. 162335, Dec. 18,2008) possessor may be, to the fulfillment of the obligation for whose security it was
 Requirements: constituted.
 Number of certificates lost or damaged is at least 10% of the total number in It is inseparable from the property mortgaged as it is a right in rem — a lien on the
possession of the RD. property whoever its owner may be. Thus, all subsequent purchasers must respect the
 In no case shall be number of certificates be less than 500. mortgage whether the transfer to them be with or without the consent of the
mortgagee, for such mortgage until discharged follows the property. (Ligon v. CA,
The administrative reconstitution of Torrens titles is intended for non-controversial cases, or supra)
especially where the subject property is not covered by an existing title in favor of a person other
than the applicant. Such an implication is consonant with the rule that the reconstitution SURRENDER OF WITHHELD CERTIFICATE
proceedings are not the venue for confirmation or adjudication of title, but merely a means by Sec. 107, PD 1529
which a previously adjudicated title whose original has been lost or destroyed may be reissued to “Sec. 107. Surrender of withheld duplicate certificates. - Where it is necessary to issue a
its owner. new certificate pursuant to any involuntary instrument which divests the title of the
registered owner or where a voluntary instrument cannot be registered because of the
The LRA has no jurisdiction over a petition for reconstitution, where the property is already refusal of the holder to surrender the owner’s duplicate certificate, the party in interest
covered by a Torrens title. (Manotok v. Barque, supra) may file a petition the court to compel surrender of the same to the Register of Deeds.
The court, after hearing, may order the registered owner or any person withholding the
SURRENDER OF WITHHELD CERTIFICATE OF TITLE duplicate certificate to surrender the same, and direct the entry of a new certificate or
memorandum upon such surrender. If the person withholding the certificate is not
SURRENDER OF CERTIFICATE IN INVOLUNTARY DEALINGS amenable to the process of the court, or if for any reason the outstanding owner’s
duplicate certificate cannot be delivered, the court may order the annulment of the
Court may compel surrender of withheld certificate same as well the issuance of a new certificate of title in lieu thereof. Such new
If an attachment or other lien in the nature of an involuntary dealing is registered and the certificate and all duplicates thereof shall contain a memorandum of the annulment of
duplicate certificate is not presented, the Register of Deeds shall, within 36 hours, the outstanding duplicate.”
request the registered owner to produce his duplicate certificate. If he refuses to
comply within a reasonable time, the RD shall report the matter to the court which In implementing the involuntary transfer of title of real property levied and sold on execution, is
shall, after notice, issue an order for the owner to produce his certificate at the time and it enough for the executing party to file a motion with the court which rendered judgment, or
place stated and may enforce the order by suitable process. (Sec. 71, PD 1529) does he need to file a separate action with the Regional Trial Court?
The proper course of action is to file a petition in court, rather than merely move, for the
Ligon v. CA, GR No. 107751, June 1, 1995 issuance of new titles. This is to afford due process to the registered landowner. (Reyes
In an action for specific performance with damages based on a contract of sale, a motion v. Tang Soat Ing, GR No. 185620, Dec. 14, 2011; Padilla v. Philippine Producers’
may be filed by the purchaser for the issuance of an order to compel the holder of the Cooperative Marketing Association, GR No. 141256, Sept. 18, 1995)
duplicate certificate of title to surrender the same to the RD.  
Even while Sec. 107 of PD 1529 speaks of a petition which can be filed by one who wants AMENDMENT AND ALTERATION
to compel another to surrender the certificates of title to the RD, this does not preclude a) No erasure, alteration, or amendment, shall be made upon the registration book
a party to a pending case to include as incident therein the relief stated under Sec. 107, after the entry of a certificate of title or of a memorandum thereon except by
especially if the subject certificates of title to be surrendered are intimately connected order of the proper Regional Trial Court. (Sec. 108, PD 1529)
with the subject matter of the principal action. This principle is based on expediency. b) No amendment or alteration shall be made except upon order of the court .
(Cuyugan v. Sy Quia, 24 Phil. A567)
Voluntary and involuntary registration c) The petition shall be filed in the original case in which the decree was entered.
In voluntary registration, such as a sale, mortgage, lease and the like, if the owner's (OCA v. Matas, 247 SCRA 9)
duplicate certificate be not surrendered and presented or if no payment of registration
fees be made within fifteen (15) days, entry in the day book of the deed of sale does The amendment and alteration of a certificate of title under Section 108 of P.D. No. 1529 is
not operate to convey and affect the land sold. applicable in seven instances or situations, namely (Paz v. Republic – 2011):
  when registered interests of any description, whether vested, contingent, expectant, or
inchoate, have terminated and ceased; An adverse claim is designed to protect the right or interest of a person over a piece of real
 when new interests have arisen or been created which do not appear upon the property and serves as a notice to third persons that someone is claiming an interest in the land
certificate; or a better right thereto than the registered owner. (Martinez v. Garcia, GR No. 166536, Feb. 4,
 when any error, omission or mistake was made in entering a certificate or any 2010)
memorandum thereon or on any duplicate certificate;
 when the name of any person on the certificate has been changed; An adverse claim based on prescription and adverse possession cannot be registered because,
 when the registered owner has been married, or, registered as married, the marriage under Sec. 47, no title to registered land shall be acquired by prescription or adverse possession.
has been terminated and no right or interest of heirs or creditors will thereby be (Estella v. Register of Deeds, 106 Phil. 911)
affected;
 when a corporation, which owned registered land and has been dissolved, has not A sale of land may not be annotated as an adverse claim because the law prescribes the remedy
conveyed the same within three years after its dissolution; and of registration of the sale and the issuance to the vendee of a transfer certificate of title. (RD v.
 when there is reasonable ground for the amendment or alteration of title. Nicandro, 111 Phil. 989; Sec. 57, PD 1529)

Under Sec. 108, in relation to Sec. 2, PD No. 1529, the court may now hear both contentions and The hereditary rights or a person registered fraudulently in her sister’s name is registrable as an
non-contentious cases. adverse claim. (Gabriel v. Register of Deeds, 9 SCRA 136)

Section 108 provides that, after notice to all the interested parties, the court may A notice of levy and subsequent sale of property cannot prevail over an existing adverse claim
(a) order the issuance of a new certificate, earlier inscribed on the certificate of title covering it. (Martinez v. Garcia, 611 SCRA 537)
(b) order the entry or cancellation of a memorandum upon a certificate, or
(c) grant any other relief upon such terms and conditions, requiring a bond if necessary, as it The Register of Deeds cannot unilaterally cancel the adverse claim. There must be a hearing for
may deem proper. the purpose. This is in line with the provision “that after cancellation, no second adverse claim
shall be registered by the same claimant. (Sanjonas v. CA, 258 SCRA 79)
But the court, sitting as a land registration court, has no jurisdiction or authority to reopen the
original decree of registration. The court cannot "impair the title or other interest of a purchaser That the foreclosure of mortgage was effected after the annotation of the adverse claim is of no
holding a certificate for value and in good faith, or his heirs or assigns, without his or their moment since the foreclosure retroacts to the date of registration of the mortgage. (Limpin v.
written consent.“ (Luzon Surety v. Mirasol, GR No. L-29313, Jan. 21, 1977) IAC, 166 SCRA 87)

Thus, the court has jurisdiction over a petition for cancellation of encumbrances despite Adverse claim is proper where there is no other provision of law for the registration of
respondent’s contention that the issue is controversial. (PNB v. International Corporate Bank, claimant’s alleged right or interest in the property.
199 SCRA 508). A notice of levy cannot prevail over an existing adverse claim inscribed in the certificate of
title.
The court can compel petitioner to surrender his owner’s duplicate certificate so that a new title A claim which arose prior to the date of the original registration cannot be entered as
may be issued to the INK despite his argument that the case involved the “registrability “ of the adverse claim.
document. (Ligon v. CA, 244 SCA 693) Where the claim is based on a perfected contract of sale by the owner of the land, the
procedure is to register the contract so that a new transfer certificate of title is issued to
ADVERSE CLAIM the vendee-claimant. (Sec. 57, PD No. 1529)
“Whoever claims any part or interest in registered land adverse to the registered owner, arising
subsequent to the original registration, may, if no other provision is made in this Decree for A mortgage is valid as between the parties even if unregistered, but registration of a mortgage is
registering the same, make a statement in writing setting forth fully his alleged right or interest, indispensable to bind third parties.
and how or under whom acquired, a reference to the number of the certificate of title of the
registered owner, the name of the registered owner, and a descritpion of the land in which the Prior registration of an adverse claim or notice of lis pendens creates a preference as against a
right or interest is claimed.” (Sec. 70, PD 1529) mortgage registered later. The subsequent registration of a prior mortgage does not diminish this
preference, which retroacts to the date of the notice of adverse claim or lis pendens. (Cruz v.
A person who claims an interest in registered land adverse to the registered owner may make a Bancom Finance Corporation, GR No. 147788, March 19, 2002)
statement under oath setting forth his alleged right or interest and how acquired, the number of
the certificate of title, name of the registered owner and a description of the land. An adverse claim is effective for thirty days; but it is not ipso facto cancelled after said period - a
separate petition is necessary. (Sajonas v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 102377, July 5, 1996)
The statement shall be registered as an adverse claim and shall be effective for 30 days.
The RD cannot unilaterally cancel the adverse claim. There must be a hearing for the purpose.
The annotation may be cancelled upon the filing a of a verified petition by the party in interest. (Diaz-Duarte v. Ong, 298 SCRA 388)
(Sec. 70, PD 1529)
 predecessor-in-interest of petitioner, instituted against Zeñarosa was for collection of
The adverse claim may be cancelled if it is frivolous or vexatious, in which case damages may sum of money with damages — a purely personal action.
be adjudged against the adverse claimant. b. Hence, the subsequent levy on execution on October 14, 2004 arising from the final
money judgment in favor of petitioner cannot prevail over the earlier annotated
LIS PENDENS attachment made by Lorenzo on September 30, 2002 and its subsequent notice of levy
Lis pendens, which literally means pending suit, refers to the jurisdiction, power or control on execution and sale of the property to respondents on January 30, 2004, who then
which a court acquires over property involved in a suit, pending the continuance of the action, took possession. (Gagoomal v. Villacorta, GR No. Jan. 18, 2012)
and until final judgment.
Purpose:
Lis pendens is intended i. to protect the rights of the party causing registration, and
a) to keep the properties in litigation within the power of the court until ii. to advise third persons that they deal with the property subject to the result of the case
the litigation is terminated and to prevent the defeat of the judgment or
decree by subsequent alienation; and A notice of lis pendens neither affects the merits of the case nor creates a right or lien.
b) to announce to the whole world that a particular property is in litigation Cancellation is proper when filed to molest adverse party or is not necessary to protect the rights
and serves as a warning that one who acquires an interest over said of the person causing registration.
property does so at his own risk, or that he gambles on the result of the
litigation over said property. (Mr Holdings, Ltd. v. Bajar, GR No. Lis pendens is proper in the following cases:
153478, Oct. 10, 2012) o Action to recover possession of property;
o Action to quiet title thereto;
A notice of lis pendens is governed by Sec. 14, Rule 13, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure o Action to remove clouds thereon;
 “SEC. 14. Notice of lis pendens. — In an action affecting the title or the right of o Action for partition; and
possession of real property, the plaintiff and the defendant, when affirmative relief is o Any other proceedings in court directly affecting the title to the land or the use or
claimed in his answer, may record in the office of the registry of deeds of the province occupation thereof or the buildings thereon.
in which the property is situated a notice of the pendency of the action. Said notice o The notice need not be annotated on the owner’s duplicate certificate of title because
shall contain the names of the parties and the object of the action or defense, and a the notice is an involuntary transaction. Entry in the day book is sufficient. (Yu v. CA,
description of the property in that province affectedthereby. Only from the time of 251 SCRA 509)
filing such notice for record shall a purchaser, or encumbrancer of the property
affected thereby, be deemed to have constructive notice of the pendency of the action, Cancellation of lis pendens
and only of its pendency against the parties designated by their real names.  The power to cancel a notice of lis pendens is exercised only under
exceptional circumstances, such as: where such circumstances are imputable to the
The notice of lis pendens hereinabove mentioned may be cancelled only upon order of the court, party who caused the annotation; where the litigation was unduly prolonged to the
after proper showing that the notice is for the purpose of molesting the adverse party, or that it is prejudice of the other party because of several continuances procured by petitioner;
not necessary to protect the rights of the party who caused it to be recorded." where the case which is the basis for the lis pendens notation was dismissed for non
prosequitur on the part of the plaintiff; or where judgment was rendered against the
A notice of lis pendens is availed of mainly in real actions. These actions are: party who caused such a notation. (J. Casim Construction v. Registrar of Deeds, GR
 an action to recover possession of real estate; No. 168655, July 2, 2010)
 an action for partition; and
 any other court proceedings that directly affect the title to the land or the building SPLITTING, CONSOLIDATION AND SUBDIVISION
thereon or the use or the occupation thereof.
ALIENS
Additionally, the annotation of lis pendens also applies to suits seeking to establish a right to, or Constitutional provisions
an equitable estate or interest in, a specific real property, or to enforce a lien, a charge or an Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be transferred or conveyed
encumbrance against it. except to individuals, corporations, ort associations qualified to acquire or hold lands
of the public domain. (Sec. 7, Art. XII)
But it does not apply to actions involving title to or any right or interest in, personal property, Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 7 of this Article, a natural-born citizen of the
such as the subject membership shares in a private non-stock corporation. (Mr Holdings v. Bajar, Philippines who has lost his Philippine citizenship may be a transferee of private lands,
supra) subject to limitations provided by law. (Sec. 8, Ibid)
Lis pendens is not proper in an action for sum of money
a. “A notice of lis pendens annotated on the cancelled TCT No. 170213 and carried over Area limitations under RA 7042 as amended by RA 8179
to Tan's TCT No. 10206 conferred upon RAM no rights over the subject property as Urban land – 5,000 square meters
well as petitioner, its successor-in-interest, since CC No. 67381, which RAM, Rural land – 3 hectares.
Under RA 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003), a natural-born citizen After the registration of the land is decreed, the winning party has the right to a title and
who has lost his Philippine citizenship by reason of his naturalization as a citizen of a foreign possession of the land which is an inherent element of ownership.
country is deemed to have “re-acquired Philippine citizenship” upon taking his oath of
allegiance to the Republic and “shall enjoy full civil and political rights” under existing laws. A writ of possession may be issued not only against the person or persons defeated but also
against anyone unlawfully occupying the land during the registration proceedings and up to the
The capacity to own land is determined at the time of its acquisition and not registration. issuance of the final decree. (Vencilao v. Vaño, GR No. L-25660, 1990)
Example: Pedro, a Filipino, bought land from Jose who at the time of the sale had already
complied with the requirements for the registration of the land. Pedro later became a The fact that there is pending action attacking the validity of the decree is not a bar to the
naturalized Canadian citizen. Pedro’s subsequent acquisition of Canadian citizenship issuance of the writ of possession in favor of the registered owners. (Id., citing Sorongon v.
will not impair his right to the land which he could have validly registered when he Makalintal, GR No. L-1692, Feb. 24, 1948)
was yet a Filipino citizen. He is also qualified under the terms of Sec. 8, Art. XII,
Constitution. (Republic v. CA and Lapiña, 235 SCRA 567) In the implementation of the writ, the sheriff cannot remove or demolish the improvements
except upon special order of the court. (Tumibay v. Soro, GR 152016, April 12, 2010
Q. Can a Filipino vendor recover land sold to an alien?
A. Yes. When an agreement is not illegal per se but is merely prohibited and the The writ will not issue against persons taking possession after issuance of the final decree.
prohibition is designed for the protection of the plaintiff, he may recover the land, the
public policy being to preserve and maintain the land in the hands of Filipino citizens . The remedy is to file a separate action for forcible entry or detainer, or a reivindicatory action.
(Phil. Banking Corp. v. Lui She, 21 SCRA 52; Borromeo v. Descallar, 580 SCA 175; (Bernas v. Nueva,127 SCA 399)
United Church v. Sebastian, 159 SCRA 446)
Note: In Rellosa v. Gaw Chee Hun, 93 Phil. 827, the Filipino vendor was in pari delicto
with the alien vendee, hence, recovery was not allowed.

When doctrine of pari delicto does not apply

“The principle underlying pari delicto as known here and in the United States is not
absolute in its application. It recognizes certain exceptions one of them being when its
enforcement or application runs counter to an avowed fundamental policy or to public
interest. As stated by us in the Rellosa case, ‘This doctrine is subject to one important
limitation, namely, whenever public policy is considered advanced by allowing either
party to sue for relief against the transaction.’” (Binayug v. Ugaddan, GR No. 181623,
Dec. 5, 2012)

Other illustrative cases on acquisition by aliens

Where the land was now in the hands of a naturalized Filipino, there is no more public
policy to be served by allowing recovery. (Barsobia v. Cuenco , 199 Phil. 26),
Where land is sold to a Chinese who later sold it to a Filipino, the sale can no longer be
impugned. (Herrera v. Guan, 1 SCRA 406).
Chuck, an American, and Cory, a Filipino, acquired land which was registered in the
latter’s name. Cory sold the land to Mario without Chuck’s consent. Valid? Yes.
Chuck never acquired any right to the land, he being an alien. (Cheesman v. IAC, 193
SCRA 93)

WRIT OF POSSESSION
A writ of possession may be issued in:
(a) land registration proceeding which is in rem;
(b) extrajudicial foreclosure of realty;
(c) judicial foreclosure of mortgage which is a quasi in rem; and
(d) execution sales.

A writ of possession may be issued not only against the person defeated in the land registration
case but also against anyone unlawfully occupying the land during the pendency of the
proceedings up to the issuance of the final decree. (Vencilao v. Vano, 182 SCRA 491