Almirol vs.
Register of Deeds of Agusan
Facts:
Petitioner bought from Arcenio Abalo a parcel of land covered by an original certificate of title in
the name of “Arcenio Abalo, married to Nicolasa M. Abalo.” He sought to register the deed of
sale and to secure in his name a transfer certificate of title. However, the Register of Deeds
refused such registration on the grounds that the property is a conjugal property, hence, it
needs the signature of both spouses.
The Register of Deeds contended that since the wife has already died when the sale was made,
the surviving husband cannot dispose of the whole property without first liquidating and
transferring the property to the surviving spouses and the heirs of the deceased.
To effect the registration of the aforesaid deed of absolute Sale, it is necessary that the property
be first liquidated and transferred in the name of the surviving spouse and the heirs of the
deceased wife by means of extrajudicial settlement or partition and that the consent of such
other heir or heirs must be procured by means of another document ratifying this sale executed
by their father.
In view of such refusal, Almirol went to the Court of First Instance on a petition for mandamus
(sp. civ. case 151), to compel the Register of Deeds to register the deed of sale and to issue to
him the corresponding transfer certificate of title.
Issue:
WON the Register of Deeds was correct in refusing the registration. -NO
WON the RTC was correct in dismissing the petition. -YES
Held
1.)The Register of Deeds was incorrect in refusing the registration.
A register of deeds is entirely precluded by section 4 of Republic Act 1151 from exercising his
personal judgment and discretion when confronted with the problem of whether to register a
deed or instrument on the ground that it is invalid. When he is in doubt as to the proper step to
be taken with respect to any deed or other instrument presented to him for registration, all that
he is supposed to do is to submit and certify the question to the Commissioner of Land
Registration who shall, after notice and hearing, enter an order prescribing the step to be taken
on the doubtful question.
Whether the document is invalid, frivolous or intended to harass, is not the duty of a Register of
Deeds to decide, but a court of competent jurisdiction.
The validity or invalidity of the documents is not for the register of deeds to determine; this
function belongs properly to a court of competent jurisdiction. Section 4 of Republic Act 1151
precludes a register of deeds from exercising his personal judgment and discretion when
confronted with the problem of whether to register a deed or instrument on the ground that it is
invalid.
2.) The RTC was correct in dismissing the petition.
The court correctly dismissed the petition for mandamus. Section 4 provides that "where any
party in interest does not agree with the Register of Deeds the question shall be submitted to
the Commissioner of Land Registration," who thereafter shall "enter an order prescribing the
step to be taken or memorandum to be made," which shall be "conclusive and binding upon all
Registers of Deeds." This administrative remedy must be resorted to by the petitioner before he
can have recourse to the courts.
Under the aforementioned Section, when the Register of Deeds is in doubt as to the proper step
to be taken with respect to any deed or other instrument presented to him for registration, all
that he is supposed to do is to submit and certify the question to the Commissioner of Land
Registration who shall, after notice and hearing, enter an order prescribing the step to be taken
on the doubtful question.
The supposed invalidity of the contracts of lease is no valid objection to their registration,
because invalidity is no proof of their non-existence or a valid excuse for denying their
registration. The law on registration does not require that only valid instruments shall be
registered. How can parties affected thereby be supposed to know their invalidity before they
become aware, actually or constructively, of their existence or of their provisions? If the purpose
of registration is merely to give notice, then questions regarding the effect or invalidity of
instruments are expected to be decided after, not before, registration. It must follow as a
necessary consequence that registration must first be allowed, and validity or effect litigated
afterwards.
Hence, the remedy of the petitioner is the administrative remedy provided under Section 4 of RA
1151 which states that “where any party in interest does not agree with the Register of Deeds ..
the question shall be submitted to the Commissioner of Land Registration,” who thereafter shall
“enter an order prescribing the step to be taken or memorandum to be made,” which shall be
“conclusive and binding upon all Registers of Deeds.”
-
a. Who may apply: Section 14 of P.D. 1529
Section 14(1): Those who by themselves or through their predecessor-in-interest have
been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of
alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of
ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
