cases in land registration

7/23/2019 Cases in Land Registration

1/3

REGISTRATION TORRENS SYSTEMA. Ownership and Title

1. Lee Tek Sheng v. Court of AppealsB. Ministerial Duty of the Register of Deeds

2. Baranda vs. Judge Gustillo, G.R. No. 81163 September 26, 1988

! Denial of Registration3. Almirol vs. The Register of Deeds of Agusan, G.R. No. L-22486, March 20, 1968

! Registration vs. Validity of Instrument4. Gabriel vs. Register of Deeds of Rizal, G.R. No. L-17956 , September 30, 1963

C. PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION

! Binds the land/Third Persons5. Obras Pias vs. Devera Ignacio, G.R. No. L-17956, September 30, 19636. Egao vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-79787, June 29, 19897. Sajonas vs. Court of Appeals, G. R. No. 102377, July 5, 19968. Aznar Brothers Realty vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128102, March 7, 2000

! Incontestability of Title9. Estrellado vs. Martinez, G.R. No. L-23847, November 18, 1925

! Notice to the World

10. Gatioan vs. Gafud, G.R. No. L-21953, March 28, 1969! To Transfer Ownership

11. Reyes vs. Noblejas, G.R. No. L-23691, November 25, 196712. Agbulos vs. Alberto, G.R. No. L-17483, July 31, l96213. Liong-Wong-Shih vs. Sunico and Peterson, G.R. No. 3072, March 21, 190714. Tabigue vs. Green, G.R. No. 4277 August 18, 190815. Buzon vs. Licauco, G.R. No. L-4966, March 27, 190916. Tuason vs. Raymundo, G.R. No. L-9372 December 15, 191417. Sikatuna vs. Guevarra, G.R. No. L-18336, March 15, 192218. Worcester vs. Ocampo, G.R. No. L-8452 August 2, 191619. Roxas vs Dinglasan, G.R. No. L-27234, May 30, 1969

D. Registration of Instruments14. NHA vs. Basa, G.R. No. 149121, April 20, 2010)15. DBP vs. Acting Register of Deeds of Nueva Ecija, UDK No. 7671, June 23, 1988

! Voluntary Instrument16.Government of the Philippine Islands v. Aballe, G.R. No. L-41342 , November 28, 193417. Bass v. De la Rama, G.R. No. L-47662, September 30, 194218.Fidelity & Surety Co. vs. Conegero, G.R. No. L-15466, February 18, 192119. Tenio-Obsequio vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 107967 March 1, 199420. Potenciano vs. Dineros, G.R. No. L-7614, May 31, 195521. Heirs of Severa P. Gregorio vs. Court of Appeals, Spouses Tan, et al. G.R. No. 117609.

December 29, 199822. Garcia vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 133140.

August 10, 1999

23. Gonzales vs. IAC, G.R. No. L-69622 January 29, 198824. Pineda vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 114172.

August 25, 2003]25. Toledo-Banaga vs. Court of Appeals, 302 SCRA 331

RECORDING OF DEALINGS IN UNREGISTERED LANDSE. Priority of Rights

23. Bayoca vs. Nogales, 340 SCRA 154 - constructive notice24. Hanopol vs. Pilapil, 7 SCRA 45225. National Grain Authority vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 38026. State Investment House vs. Court of Appeals, 254 SCRA 368

PRINCIPLES UNDER THE TORRENS TITLE SYSTEMA. Indefeasibility

! A Torrens Certificate of Title is the best evidence of ownership of lands described therein27. Villanueva vs Court of Appeals, 198 SCRA 472

! A Torrens title gives constructive notice to the whole world and no one can plead ignorance ofthe registration of the land.


2/3

28. Egao vs. Court of Appeals, 174 SCRA 484

! A Torrens title bars all prior claims not registered on the title.29. Republic vs. Umali, 171 SCRA 647

! A Torrens certificate of title serves as evidence of an indefeasible title to the property in favourof the person whose names appear therein.30. Muyco vs. Court of Appeals, 204 SCRA 358

! One who deals with property registered under the Torrens system need not go beyond thesame, but only has to rely on the title. He is charged with notice only of such burden and claimsas are annotated in the title. He is not required to explore further than what the Torrens title onits face indicates, in quest for any hidden defect or inchoate right that may subsequently defeathis right on the title.31. Seno vs. Mangubat, 156 SCRA 113

! Where innocent third persons relying on the correctness of the certificate of title issued,acquired rights over the property, the court cannot disregard such rights and order the totalcancellation of the certificate for that would impair public confidence in the certificate of title;otherwise everyone dealing with the property registered under the Torrens system would haveto inquire in every instance as to whether the title had been regularly or irregularly issued by thecourt

32. Case! A mortgagee has the right to rely on what appears in the certificate of title and, in the absence

of anything to excite suspicion, he is under no obligation to look beyond the certificate andinvestigate the title of the mortgagor appearing on the face of said certificate.33. Case

! A certificate of title shall not be subject to collateral attack. It cannot be altered, modified orcancelled except in a direct proceedings in accordance with law.34. Lopez vs. Alberto, G.R. No. L-27559 May 18, 197235. Toyota Motors Philippines vs. Court of Appeals, 216 SCRA 23636. National Grain Authority vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 380

B. Presumptions

!A Torrens title is presumed to have been regularly and legally issued unless contradicted andovercome by clear, convincing, strong and irrefutable evidence more than preponderant ofevidence. The presumption is that the transferee of the registered land is not aware of anydefect in the title of the property he purchased.37. Salao vs. Salao, 70 SCRA 65

! Thus, every person dealing with registered land may safely rely on the correctness of thecertificate of title issued therefor.38. Halili vs. Court of Industrial Relations 257 SCRA 174

C. Fraud

! The Torrens system was not designed to shield and protect one who had committed fraud ormisrepresentation and thus holds title in bad faith. The Torrens system only protects a titleholder in good faith.

39. Walstron vs. Mapa, Jr. 181 SCRA 431! The person in whose name the land is fraudulently registered holds it as a mere trustee, with

the legal obligation to reconvey the property and that title thereto in veer of the true owner.40. Pajarillo vs. IAC, 176 SCRA 340

! Any registration procured by the presentation of a forged duplicate certificate of title, or a forgeddeed or other instruments shall be null and void.41. Case

! A forged instrument may become the root of a valid title.42. Torrens vs. Court of Appeals, 186 SCRA 672

! The doctrine that a forged instrument may become the root of a valid title cannot be appliedwhere the owner holds a valid and existing certificate of tile covering the same interest in realty.

43. Torres vs. Court of Appeals, 186 SCRA 672! A fraudulent or forged document of sale may become the root of a valid title if the certificate of

title has already been transferred from the name of the true owner to the name of the forger orthe name indicated by the forger.


3/3

44. Case

! The law requires a higher degree of prudence from one who buys from a person who is not theregistered owner, although the land object of the transaction is registered.

While one who buysfrom the registered owner does not need to look behind the certificate of title, one who buysfrom one who is not the registered owner is expected to examine not only the certificate of titlebut all factual circumstances necessary for [one] to determine if there are any flaws in the titleof the transferor, or in [the] capacity to transfer the land.45. Abad vs. Guimba, G.R. No. 157002, July 29, 2005

! As between two innocent persons, the now who made it possible for the wrong to be doneshould be the one to bear the resulting loss.46. Legarda vs. Court of Appeals, 280 SCRA 642

! As between two persons, both of whom are in good faith and both innocent of any negligence,the law must protect and prefer the playful holder of a registered title over the transfer of avendor bereft of any transmissible rights.47. Baltazar vs. Court of Appeals, 168 SCRA 354

B. Priority of Rights

! Priority of Rights - He who is first in time is preferred in right. The act of registration in theRegistry of Deeds shall be the operative act to convey or affect the land insofar as third persons

are concer48. Register of Deeds vs. PNB, 13 SCRA 46

! Where two certificates of two include the same land, the certificate that is earlier in dateprevails.49. Garcia vs. Court of Appeals, 95 SCRA 380

cases in land registration

Documents