This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-06-17 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| Deserving scant consideration is petitioners' claim that the failure of the Register of Deeds to produce a copy of the Deed of Conveyance proves that Datu Kuli never sold Lot 2327 to anyone. Other than their self-serving claim that the sale never happened, petitioners failed to present any other evidence to prove that Lot 2327 had never been purchased by respondent Pia. It requires more than petitioners' bare allegation to defeat TCT 1608, which on its face enjoys the legal presumption of regularity of issuance.[28] | |||||
|
2004-06-21 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| "Applying this principle, x x x the execution sale of unregistered land in favor of petitioner is of no effect because the land no longer belonged to the judgment debtor as of the time of the said execution sale."[28] Petitioners cannot validly argue that they were fraudulently misled into believing that the property was unregistered. A Torrens title, once registered, serves as a notice to the whole world.[29] All persons must take notice, and no one can plead ignorance of the registration.[30] | |||||