Reliable document

This is another case of a purchase of a parcel of land covered by Certificate of Title issued under the Torrens System of Registration. The land in this case had an area of 22.1688 hectares located at Barrio Tanay, Almanza, Las Piñas, Rizal. It was originally registered on 22 August, 1937 as Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. 383 in the name of Geronimo Reyes (not the true name) pursuant to a free patent granted by the President of the Philippines on May 12, 1937 under Act 141.

On June 7, 1955, Geronimo Reyes sold the land covered by OCT 383 to the spouses Mario and Lucy. The corresponding Deed of Sale was registered in the Registry of Deeds of Pasig, Rizal and annotated at the back of OCT 383 which was cancelled and in lieu thereof, the Pasig Register of Deeds issued TCT No. 38910-A in the name of the spouses Mario and Lucy. Due to the decentralization of the Office of the Register of Deeds of Rizal, TCT No. 38910-A was one of those transferred to the Registry of Deeds of Pasay City which was given a new number - TCT 13674-A. Later on the said TCT was transferred to the Registry of Deeds of Las Piñas, Rizal.

On May 8, 1985, after 29 years of continuous, actual, public and adverse possession of said property, the Government, represented by the Land Registration Commissioner (LRC) filed a Complaint against Mario, Lucy and the Register of Deeds of Pasig in the Regional Trial Court for annulment of TCT No. 38910-A on the ground that it is fake and spurious. The complaint was based on the report of a Verification Committee of the Land Registration Authority (LRA) showing that OCT 383 from which TCT 38910-A originated was in the name of Pedro Reyes, not Geronimo Reyes and that this OCT 383 was issued pursuant to Free Patent 13409 issued by the Governor General of the Philippines on March 7, 1932 covering a parcel of land situated in Barrio Sampaloc, Tanay, Rizal with an area of 22.8387 hectares. The LRC contended that TCT No. 38910-A in the names of Mario and Lucy is a nullity because they derived their title from OCT 383. LRC insisted that there is only one OCT 383 and it was in the name of Pedro Reyes based on Free Patent 13409, not in the name of Geronimo Reyes, although said OCT 383 in the name of Pedro Reyes was no longer available in the records of the Registry of Deeds. Was the LRC correct?

No. There being no OCT 383 in the name of Pedro Reyes, LRC’s allegations that Mario and Lucy obtained their title through fraud and misrepresentation by making it appear that it originated from OCT 383 must fail. Even assuming that OCT 383 was issued to Pedro Reyes on the basis of Free Patent 13409, it cannot be said that Mario and Lucy committed fraud in obtaining their title because the land covered by Free Patent 13409 is in Barrio Sampaloc, Tanay, Rizal while the Free Patent of Geronimo Reyes is in Almanza, Las Piñas.

Furthermore, assuming that there was a defect on OCT 383 in the name of Geronimo Reyes, the spouses have acquired rights over the property as buyers in good faith. As far as they are concerned the OCT 383 shown to them was free from any flaw or defect that could give rise to any iota of evidence that it is fake and spurious. A Torrens Title is generally conclusive evidence of ownership of land referred therein, and a strong presumption exists that a Torres Title was regularly issued and valid. A Torrens Title is incontrovertible against any other title existing prior to its issuance not annotated thereon. Persons dealing with property covered by a Torrens Certificate of Title are not required to go beyond what appears on its face. Where innocent third persons, relying on the correctness of the certificate of title thus issued, acquire rights over the property, the court cannot disregard such right and order the cancellation of the certificate. The sanctity of the Torrens system must be preserved; otherwise, everyone dealing with the property registered under the system will have to inquire in every instance as to whether the title had been regularly or irregularly issued contrary to the evident purpose of the law. Every person dealing with the registered land may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of title issued therefore and the law will in no way oblige him to go behind the certificate to determine the condition of the property. LRC’s complaint must therefore be dismissed (Republic vs. Orfinada, Sr. et. al. G.R. 141145, November 12, 2004). E-mail: [email protected]