This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-12-14 |
TINGA, J, |
||||
| Will it be necessary to remand these cases to the trial courts to determine which of the Certificates of Title are valid? If so, which trial court?[25] A crucial fact emerged during the oral arguments. The Republic, through the Solicitor General,[26] strenuously argued that contrary to the supposition reflected in the Advisory, there was, in fact, only one OCT No. 994. x x x In this particular case, it appears that on December 3, 1912, the Court of Land Registration, the Judge Norberto Romualdez presiding, acting on Land Registration Case No. 4429 rendered judgment ordering the GLRO to issue a decree. Pursuant to this order, the GLRO prepared Decree No. 36455 and issued the same on April 19, 1917 at 9:00 o'clock in the morning, at Manila, Philippines. It may be observed that at the face of the OCT 994 which was then on file at the Registry of Deeds of Caloocan and now kept in the LRA, the following entry can be seen. Received for transcription at the Office of the Register of Deeds for the province of Rizal this 3rd day of May 1917 at 7:30 a.m. Obviously, April 19, 1917 is not the date of inscription or the date of transcription of the decree into the Original Certificate of Title. It appears that the transcription of the decree was done on the date it was received by the Register of Deeds of Rizal on May 3, 1917. There is no other date to speak of. In the records of the Land Registration Authority, there is only one OCT 994, on its face appears the date of transcript, May 3, 1917. The validity then of all subsequent titles tracing their origin from OCT 994 should be tested in the light of these set of facts. x x x[27] On the other hand, the counsel for CLT stated during the same oral argument that he had seen a photocopy of an OCT No. 994 that was dated 19 April 1917,[28] and manifested that he could attach the same to CLT's memorandum.[29] At the same time, on even date, the Court directed the Solicitor General and counsel for CLT to submit to the Court "certified true copies of the Original Certificate of Title No. 994 dated May 3 1917 and April 19, 1917, respectively, on or before Friday, August 4, 2006."[30] | |||||
|
2006-06-20 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| It should be recalled that in the said report/findings, the LRA declared respondent's owner's duplicate of TCT No. 305917 as highly questionable since it shows that TCT No. 305917 was issued and recorded by the Quezon City Register of Deeds on 20 November 1979, ahead of Judicial Form No. 3842367, which was issued only on 21 September 1982. Judicial Form No. 3842367 is supposed to be the administrative form issued by the LRA to the Quezon City Register of Deeds directing the latter to issue TCT No. 305917; thus, TCT No. 305917 could not have been issued before Judicial Form No. 3842367. Although the LRA report/findings refer only to the owner's duplicate of TCT No. 305917, it actually raises doubt even as to the authenticity of the original copy of TCT No. 305917, because the owner's duplicate certificate merely reflects the date when the original copy of TCT No. 305917 was issued and recorded by the Quezon City Register of Deeds, which was on 20 November 1979. Delving into such an issue may constitute a violation of the rule that a Torrens title cannot be collaterally attacked.[39] | |||||