Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1946 > February 1946 Decisions > G.R. No. L-71 February 26, 1946 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. ALEJO ABISIA, ET AL.

076 Phil 205:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-71. February 26, 1946.]

THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Petitioner, v. ALEJO ABISIA ET AL., claimants. FILOMENA LLANDA and LUCIA LLANDA, Petitioners-Appellants.

Filemon Sotto for Appellants.

First Assistant Solicitor General Reyes and Solicitor Alikpala for Petitioner.

SYLLABUS


1. LAND REGISTRATION; CANCELLATION OF ORIGINAL, AND ISSUANCE OF NEW, CERTIFICATE OF TITLE: AUTHORITY OF COURT TO IMPOSE CONDITIONS. — Under section 112 of Act No. 496, the court may order the issuance of a new certificate of title upon such terms and conditions as may deem proper, for the protection of any creditors, heirs or other parties in interest, if any there should be, as in the case of summary settlement and adjudication under the Rules of Court.


D E C I S I O N


HILADO, J.:


On September 15, 1921, original certificate of title No. 8809 of the Property Registry of the Province of Cebu was issued, covering cadastral lot No. 7482 of the City of Cebu, in favor and in the names of Antonia, Remedios, Antolina,Jose, and Juan, all surnamed Brigaudit, the first as the owner of 4/8 and the last four as the owners each of 1/8 undivided interest in the land together with the improvements existing thereon. These registered owners were brothers and sisters who had inherited the said parcel of land and its improvements from their deceased parents. In the course of time they also successively died, leaving no will, nor descendants, nor ascendants, with the exception of Antonia Brigaudit who left two legitimate daughters, the present appellants Filomena Llanda and Lucia Llanda.

On June 20, 1945, Filomena Llanda, by counsel, filed with the Court of First Instance of Cebu a verified petition, praying , upon the grounds therein alleged, that after the proper proceedings the said original certificate of title No. 8809 be ordered cancelled and in its stead a new one issued by the Register of Deeds in favor and in the names of the said Filomena Llanda and her sister Lucia Llanda share and share alike. The Court of First Instance of Cebu ordered the publication of the proper notice in the newspaper Morning Times of Cebu, advising the whole world, particularly any interested persons, of the filing of said petition, and setting the hearing thereof for the 23d of July, 1945. The notice was published in the said newspaper once a week for three consecutive weeks prior to the date of the hearing, and on the 23d of July, 1945, at the hour fixed in the notice, the hearing was held, no opposition to the petition having been presented.

The said court after receiving the evidence of the petitioners, granted their petition , and ordered the Register of Deeds of the Province of Cebu to cancel the said original certificate of title No. 8809 covering said lot No. 7482 and, in its stead, to issue a new one in the names of Filomena LLanda, of legal age, married to Faustino Velez, Filipina, and resident in the City of Cebu, share and share alike, subject to the following condition:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Este pronunciamiento estara sujeto a la reclamacion de cualquier heredero, acreedor, legatario o de cualquiera persona interesada, dentro del plazo de dos años desde la fecha de esta decision."cralaw virtua1aw library

Counsel for Filomena Llanda and Lucia Llanda, in their behalf, filed on July 27, 1945, a motion for reconsideration, praying that the foregoing condition upon which the said court had granted their petition of June 20, 1945, be eliminated from the court’s decision. That motion for reconsideration having been denied, this appeal has been interposed in forma pauperis by the said petitioners, which appeal raises the single question of whether or not the lower court erred in subjecting its order to the aforesaid condition.

Section 112 of Act No. 496 contains the following provisions pertinent to the question thus presented:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

". . . Any registered owner or other person in interest may at any time apply by petition to the court, upon the ground that the registered interests of any description, whether vested, contingent, expectant or inchoate, have terminated or ceased; or that new interests have arisen or been created which do not appear upon the certificate; . . . and the court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine the petition after notice to all parties in interest, and may order the entry of a new certificate, . . . or grant any other relief upon such terms and conditions, requiring security if necessary, as it may deem proper: . . ." (Italics supplied.) .

In the case of Government of the Philippine Islands v. Serafica (61 Phil., 93, 102), which in all essentials respects is similar to the one at bar, this Court laid down the following procedure, which the lower court in the case at bar has followed:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"However, the Justices who concur in this decision are of the opinion that, in order to better safeguard the rights of those who may have interest in the land, the trial court should proceed to the publication of the petition in the manner provided in section 597 of the Code of Civil Procedure and that a guardian ad litem should first be appointed to legally represent the minor Veronica Abalos. If after the said publications and the subsequent hearing, the material and essential allegations of the petition appear to have been proven, then the said court, shall grant the said petition, approve the subdivision plan, cancel the original certificate of title to the new lots in favor of the respective owners thereof."cralaw virtua1aw library

If the petitioners herein had resorted to the procedure laid down in the Rules of Court for the summary settlement of estates of small value, any adjudication in their favor would have been subjected to the conditions and limitations provided for in Rule 74, sections 3, 4 and 5. Instead of doing so, they directly filed their petition in the cadastral case under section 112 of Act No. 496, and the lower court rightly required the adoption of the same safeguards for the protection of any creditors, heirs or their parties in interest, if any there should be, as in the case of such summary settlement and adjudication under the Rules of Court. Besides, the very law under which the petition was presented, section 112 of Act. 496, supplies ample authority for the requirement imposed by the lower court.

The appealed judgment is affirmed with costs.

Ozaeta, De Joya, Perfecto, and Bengzon, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






February-1946 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-39 February 1, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JULIAN ABANA

    076 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-51 February 1, 1946 - VICTORIA LICHAUCO v. MANUEL GUASH

    076 Phil 5

  • G.R. No. L-89 February 1, 1946 - JOSE TOPACIO NUENO, ET AL v. GERARDO ANGELES, ET AL

    076 Phil 12

  • G.R. No. L-112 February 1, 1946 - JOSE MITSCHIENER v. CONRADO BARRIOS, ET AL

    076 Phil 55

  • C.A. No. 227 February 1, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEON CASTILLO, ET AL.

    076 Phil 72

  • G.R. No. L-24 February 6, 1946 - EL PUEBLO DE LAS ISLAS FILIPINAS v. FELIPE LUNA

    076 Phil 101

  • G.R. No. L. -65 February 6, 1916

    ADELA G. ESTRELLA, ET AL v. BRAULIO SANGALANG

    076 Phil 108

  • G.R. No. L-75 February 6, 1946 - PHIL. SUGAR ESTATES DEVELOPMENT CO. v. GABRIELA PRUDENCIO

    076 Phil 111

  • G.R. No. L-180 February 6, 1946 - EUGENIO EVANGELISTA v. M. L. DE LA ROSA

    076 Phil 115

  • C.A. No. 762 February 6, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SILVERIO NEBREJA, ET AL.

    076 Phil 119

  • C.A. No. 501 February 11, 1946 - MERCEDES SOMERA VDA. DE NAVARRO Y OTROS v. TOMAS NAVARRO Y OTROS

    076 Phil 122

  • G.R. No. L-72 February 14, 1946 - CATALINA CRUZ y ELIGIO GUMATAY v. DoMINGA AVILA

    076 Phil 133

  • G.R. No. L-77 February 15, 1946 - EL PUEBLO DE LAS ISLAS FILIPINAS v. LIWANAG QUEMUEL Y BERNARDO

    076 Phil 135

  • G.R. No. L-114 February 15, 1946 - AQUILINO DACANAY, ET AL. v. ANTONIO G. LUCERO

    076 Phil 139

  • G.R. No. L-62 February 18, 1946 - OLIMPIA K. VDA. DE DIMAYUGA v. GASPARA RAYMUNDO, ET AL

    076 Phil 143

  • G.R. No. L-98 February 19, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TOMAS S. TEODORO

    076 Phil 163

  • G.R. No. L-195 February 20, 1946 - FRANCISCO ARCEGA v. DOROTEO DIZON

    076 Phil 164

  • G.R. No. L-52 February 21, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO DE LA CRUZ Y TOJOS, ET AL

    076 Phil 169

  • Adm. Matter No. 384 February 21, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NICOLAS JAURIGUE, ET AL

    076 Phil 174

  • Adm. Case No. 226 February 25, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DELFIN BAUTISTA

    076 Phil 184

  • G.R. No. L-57 February 25, 1946 - JOSE BELMONTE v. ANGEL MARIN

    076 Phil 198

  • G.R. No. L-45 February 26, 1946 - ANGEL JOSE REALTY CORP. v. FELIX GALAO, ET AL.

    076 Phil 201

  • G.R. No. L-71 February 26, 1946 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. ALEJO ABISIA, ET AL.

    076 Phil 205

  • G.R. No. L- 225 February 26, 1946 - MAGDALENA COBARRUBIAS v. ARSENIO P. DIZON, ET AL

    076 Phil 209

  • G.R. No. L-43 February 27, 1946 - PILAR DOMINGO VDA. DE BUHAY v. CARMEN COBARRUBIAS

    076 Phil 213

  • G.R. No. L-73 February 27, 1946 - FRANCISCO MANALAC v. GREGORIA C. GARCIA

    076 Phil 216

  • G.R. No. L-118 February 28, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEX JUREIDINI

    076 Phil 219

  • G.R. No. L-144 February 28, 1946 - ALEJANDRO RODULFA v. FRANCISCO ALFONSO, ET AL

    076 Phil 225

  • Adm. Matter No. 70 February 28, 1946 - COMMONWEALTH OF THE PHIL. v. MIGUEL BATAC

    076 Phil 233