ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
May-1958 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-11219 May 7, 1958 - PACITA SALABARIA VDA. DE SUATARON v. HAWAIIAN-PHILIPPINE COMPANY

    103 Phil 647

  • G.R. No. L-11580 May 9, 1958 - MARCELINO GABRIEL v. GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM

    103 Phil 651

  • G.R. No. L-11231 May 12, 1958 - ROSARIO CARBONNEL v. JOSE PONCIO

    103 Phil 655

  • G.R. No. L-9531 May 14, 1958 - WARNER BARNES & CO. v. GUILLERMO C. REYES

    103 Phil 662

  • G.R. No. L-11578 May 14, 1958 - GERONIMO AVECILLA v. HON. NICASIO YATCO

    103 Phil 666

  • G.R. No. L-11629 May 14, 1958 - CELEDONIO E. ESCUDERO v. ANTONIO G. LUCERO

    103 Phil 672

  • G.R. No. L-10559 May 16, 1958 - IN RE: YU NEAM v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 677

  • G.R. No. L-10657 May 16, 1958 - NUMERIANO L. VALERIANO, ET AL. v. CONCEPCION KERR, ET AL.

    103 Phil 681

  • G.R. No. L-11285 May 16, 1958 - VICENTE SAPTO v. APOLONIA FABIANA

    103 Phil 683

  • G.R. No. L-11924 May 16, 1958 - ISIDORO CEBRERO v. JOSE TALAMAN

    103 Phil 687

  • G.R. No. L-8776 May 19, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO CRUZ

    103 Phil 693

  • G.R. No. L-11539 May 19, 1958 - ARING BAGOBA v. ENRIQUE A. FERNANDEZ

    103 Phil 706

  • G.R. No. L-11305 May 21, 1958 - DOMINADOR P. CANLAS, ET AL. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 712

  • G.R. No. L-12375 May 21, 1958 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ALTO SURETY & INSURANCE CO.

    103 Phil 717

  • G.R. No. L-8317 May 23, 1958 - GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JUAN ABAD, ET AL.

    103 Phil 725

  • G.R. No. L-10286 May 23, 1958 - LUIS E. ARRIOLA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 730

  • G.R. No. L-10704 May 23, 1958 - SIMEON TAN LIM v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 736

  • G.R. No. L-11036 May 23, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENTINO TOLENTINO

    103 Phil 741

  • G.R. No. L-11060 May 23, 1958 - A. U. VALENCIA & Co. v. HERMINIA C. LAYUG, ET AL.

    103 Phil 747

  • G.R. No. L-11152 May 23, 1958 - BENITO CO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 750

  • G.R. No. L-11442 May 23, 1958 - MANUELA T. VDA. DE SALVATIERRA v. LORENZO C. GARLITOS

    103 Phil 757

  • G.R. No. L-11504 May 23, 1958 - ELISEO SAULOG v. N. BAENS DEL ROSARIO

    103 Phil 765

  • G.R. No. L-7451 May 26, 1958 - HACIENDA LUISITA v. BOARD OF TAX APPEALS

    103 Phil 770

  • G.R. No. L-10610 May 26, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO SILVELA

    103 Phil 773

  • G.R. No. L-11361 May 26, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIX SEMAÑADA

    103 Phil 790

  • G.R. No. L-8190 May 28, 1958 - GONZALO GARCIA v. CONSOLACION MANZANO

    103 Phil 798

  • G.R. No. L-9328 May 28, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMBROSIO PAUNIL, ET AL.

    103 Phil 804

  • G.R. No. L-10322 May 28, 1958 - GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JACINTA ALVAREZ

    103 Phil 816

  • G.R. No. L-10574 May 28, 1958 - PANAY ELECTRIC CO. v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL.

    103 Phil 819

  • G.R. No. L-10931 May 28, 1958 - FLORENClA R. SORIANO v. ONG HOO

    103 Phil 829

  • G.R. No. L-10972 May 28, 1958 - IN RE: PERFECTO GOTAUCO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 834

  • G.R. No. L-10989 May 28, 1958 - PONCIANO GACHO v. SERGIO OSMEÑA

    103 Phil 837

  • G.R. No. L-11112 May 28, 1958 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. LUZON SURETY COMPANY

    103 Phil 853

  • G.R. No. L-11271 May 28, 1958 - PAZ TY SIN TEI v. JOSE LEE DY PIAO

    103 Phil 858

  • G.R. No. L-11311 May 28, 1958 - MARTA C. ORTEGA v. DANIEL LEONARDO

    103 Phil 870

  • G.R. No. L-11412 May 28, 1958 - MAURICIA VDA. DE VILLANUEVA v. MONTANO A. ORTIZ

    103 Phil 875

  • G.R. No. L-11427 May 28, 1958 - DIMAS REYES v. FIDEL D. DONES

    103 Phil 884

  • G.R. No. L-11491 May 28, 1958 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. BIENVENIDA JOCSON LAGNITON

    103 Phil 889

  • G.R. No. L-11538 May 28, 1958 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, ET AL. v. JEA COMMERCIAL, ET AL.

    103 Phil 894

  • G.R. No. L-11640 May 28, 1958 - CLAUDIO DEGOLLACION v. LI CHUI

    103 Phil 904

  • G.R. No. L-11744 May 28, 1958 - PILAR GIL VDA. DE MURCIANO v. AUDITOR GENERAL

    103 Phil 907

  • G.R. No. L-12196 May 28, 1958 - ASSISTANT PROVINCIAL FISCAL OF BATAAN v. AMBROSIO T. DOLLETE

    103 Phil 914

  • G.R. Nos. L-12214-17 May 28, 1958 - MALIGAYA SHIP WATCHMEN AGENCY v. ASSOCIATED WATCHMEN AND SECURITY UNION (PTWO)

    103 Phil 920

  • G.R. No. L-12222 May 28, 1958 - UNIVERSITY OF SAN AGUSTIN v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

    103 Phil 926

  • G.R. No. L-12289 May 28, 1958 - LIM SIOK HUEY v. ALFREDO LAPIZ

    103 Phil 930

  • G.R. No. L-12348 May 28, 1958 - MARIANO CORDOVA v. GREGORIO NARVASA

    103 Phil 935

  • G.R. No. L-13069 May 28, 1958 - JOVENCIO A. REYES v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

    103 Phil 940

  • G.R. No. L-12287 May 29, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FORTUNATO ORTIZ, ET AL.

    103 Phil 944

  • G.R. No. L-7955 May 30, 1958 - JOAQUIN LOPEZ v. ENRIQUE P. OCHOA

    103 Phil 950

  • G.R. No. L-8439 May 30, 1958 - CO CHO CHIT v. HANSON, ORTH & STEVENSON, INC., ET AL.

    103 Phil 956

  • G.R. No. L-10642 May 30, 1958 - IN RE: ALFREDO ONG v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 964

  • G.R. Nos. L-10837-38 May 30, 1958 - ASSOCIATED INSURANCE & SURETY COMPANY v. ISABEL IYA

    103 Phil 972

  • G.R. No. L-10952 May 30, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENIGNO V. LINGAD

    103 Phil 980

  • G.R. No. L-11073 May 30, 1958 - MELECIO ARCEO v. ANDRES E. VARELA

    103 Phil 990

  • G.R. No. L-11374 May 30, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIOSCORO PINUILA

    103 Phil 992

  • G.R. No. L-11444 May 30, 1958 - VICENTE ROULLO v. MARGARITO LUMAYNO

    103 Phil 1004

  • G.R. No. L-11498 May 30, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBEN J. RODRIGUEZ

    103 Phil 1008

  • G.R. Nos. L-11531-33 May 30, 1958 - MARIA CONCEPCION v. PAYATAS ESTATE IMPROVEMENT CP. INC.

    103 Phil 1016

  • G.R. No. L-12053 May 30, 1958 - ROBERTA C. DIAZ v. JESUS Y. PEREZ

    103 Phil 1023

  • G.R. No. L-12081 May 30, 1958 - LORENZO LERMA v. VICTORIANO L. REYES, ET AL.

    103 Phil 1027

  • G.R. No. L-12530 May 30, 1958 - CONSOLIDATED LABOR ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HERMOGENES CALUAG

    103 Phil 1032

  • G.R. No. L-12567 May 30, 1958 - TAN GIN SAN v. ROSALIA A. TAN CARPIZO

    103 Phil 1042

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-8317   May 23, 1958 - GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JUAN ABAD, ET AL. <br /><br />103 Phil 725

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-8317. May 23, 1958.]

    THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JUAN ABAD, ET AL. CALIXTO C. AQUINO, petitioner and appellee, FENICULA MOLINO, ROSANELIA MOLINO and MIGUEL MOLINO, Oppositors-Appellants.

    Elias Canapi for Appellee.

    Alfredo J. Donato and Jorge K. Siriban for appellants.


    SYLLABUS


    1. LAND REGISTRATION; RECORDING OF INSTRUMENTS RELATING TO LAND; WHEN SUCH INSTRUMENTS MAY BE PRESENTED TO COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE. — After the filing of the application and before the issuance of the decree of title by the Chief of the General Land Registration Office, the interested party may present documents relating to the land to the Court of First Instance, instead of presenting them to the office of the register of deeds, together with a motion that the same be considered in relation with the application, and the court, after notice to the parties, shall order such land registered subject to the encumbrance created by said instrument, or order the decree of registration issued in the name of the buyer or of the person to whom the property has been conveyed by sold instrument. (Section 29, Act 496, as amended.)

    2. COURTS; CADASTRAL OR LAND REGISTRATION COURT; JURISDICTION OF. — The Court of First Instance acting, as a cadastral court or a court of land registration, has limited authority. It cannot determine whether the document reflects or not the true agreement between the parties, or whether the execution thereof is tainted with fraud. Much less may it render judgment for the payment of sum of money, for the use and occupation of the land. These matters are proper subject of an ordinary action and are beyond the province of a cadastral case.


    D E C I S I O N


    CONCEPCION, J.:


    This is an appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of Cagayan.

    It appears that on December 18, 1933, decision was rendered in cadastral case No. 25 of the Court of First Instance of Cagayan, G.L.R.O. Record No. 3189, adjudicating a specific portion of Lot No. 382 thereof to Perfecto Molino, another specific portion to Maximiano Molino, and a third portion, likewise, specified, to Anselmo Molino. On January 11, 1938, after said decision had become final, but before the issuance of the corresponding decree, Anselmo Molino and Calixto C. Aquino executed the instrument Exhibit F, purporting to be a deed of sale, transfer and conveyance to Calixto C. Aquino of the portion of Lot No. 382 adjudicated to Anselmo Molino as above stated. The consideration, according to Exhibit F, was P1,400, of which P800 was paid in cash, the balance of P600 to be paid in installments, at the rate of P10 a month, beginning from March 1, 1938. On August 21, 1941, said Lot 382 was subdivided into Lot 382-A, which is the portion adjudicated to Perfecto Molino, Lot 382-B, which is the portion of Maximiano Molino, and Lot 382-C, which is the portion of Anselmo Molino. Owing, evidently, to the outbreak of war in the Pacific and the occupation of the Philippines by the Japanese forces, the corresponding subdivision plan, PSD-19421, was not approved by the Director of Lands until December 29, 1948. On August 17, 1951, Calixto C. Aquino filed, in said cadastral case, a petition setting forth the foregoing facts and alleging that he had already paid in full the price of Lot No. 382-C and praying that the decree, as regards this subdivision lot, be issued in his favor.

    This petition was objected to by Miguel, Fenicula and Rosanelia Molino — hereafter referred to as appellants — the children and heirs of Anselmo Molino, who died on December 24, 1939. The opposition was contained in a pleading entitled "Answer, with special defense and counterclaim." It was alleged therein that the true agreement between the parties to said Exhibit F was one of mortgage to guarantee the payment of a debt of Anselmo Molino in favor of Calixto C. Aquino; that said debt had already been fully paid with the rentals collected by Aquino from Yutivo Sons Hardware Co., which held said Lot 382-C under a contract of lease with Anselmo; that Aquino had constructed a house of mixed materials on said lot; and that, for the use and occupation thereof, he should pay P50 a month, beginning from April, 1947. Appellants prayed, therefore, that "judgment" be rendered dismissing Aquino’s petition and declaring that appellants are the lawful owners of Lot No. 382-C, that the contract between Anselmo Molino and the appellee was one of mortgage and that the obligation guaranteed by the same had been fully paid as of March, 1947, and sentencing Aquino to pay P2,600, as rentals from April, 1947 to July, 1951, and, thereafter, the sum of P50 a month, until the final termination of the case.

    After due hearing, the Court of First Instance of Cagayan issued an order, dated November 28, 1952, holding that, in the exercise of its jurisdiction as court of land registration, it had no authority to pass upon the issues raised by appellants and that such issues are proper for determination in an ordinary civil action, and accordingly, overruling their opposition and dismissing their counterclaim. The dispositive part of said order is as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "It appearing that the decision of this Court (App. A) has already become long final; that the subdivision thereby ordered has already been made, as evidence by the plan Psd-19421 (App. B), and that Anselmo Molino sold Lot 382-C to the herein petitioner, Calixto C. Aquino, under and by virtue of the deed of sale (App. F), the Chief, General Land Registration Office, is hereby ordered to issue the corresponding decree of registration as follows: To Perfecto Molino, Lot 382-A; To Maximiano Molino, Lot 382-B; and to Calixto C. Aquino, Lot 382-C."cralaw virtua1aw library

    In due time, Miguel, Fenicula and Rosanelia Molino appealed from this order to the Court of Appeals, which, thereafter, certified the record to this Court, it appearing that appellants merely raise questions of law. They maintain that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "1. The lower court erred in overruling the opposition of the claimants-oppositors-appellants, and in dismissing the answer, special defense and counter-claim of the said claimants-oppositors-appellants.

    "2. The lower court erred in finding that Anselmo Molino sold Lot 382-C to the petitioner-appellee, Calixto C. Aquino and ordering the issuance of a decree in favor of the petitioner and appellee."cralaw virtua1aw library

    In support of the first assignment of error, it is urged that the cases of Castillo v. Ramos, * 45 Off. Gaz., 183 and Nicolas Lizares & Co. v. Tan, relied upon by the lower court, are not in point, because: (1) no decree has been issued, as yet; (2) appellee’s alleged right is not as yet indefeasible; (3) his petition, in effect, seeks to set aside the decision of the Cadastral Court dated December 18, 1933; and (4) appellee’s claim is assailed by the appellants upon the ground of fraud.

    Appellants’ pretense is devoid of merit. To begin with, appellee does not seek a modification of said final decision. On the contrary, he invokes it in his favor. Precisely, because said decision declared that a definite portion of Lot 382 belongs to Anselmo Molino, appellee prays that such portion be decreed in his favor, Anselmo having conveyed it to him by virtue of Exhibit F. This relief is explicitly authorized by section 29 of Act No. 496 as amended by Act No. 3901, reading:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "After the filing of the application and before the issuance of the decree of title by the Chief of the General Land Registration Office, the land therein described may be dealt with and instruments relating thereto shall be recorded in the office of the register of deeds at any time before issuance of the decree of title, in the same manner as if no application had been made. The interested party may, however, present such instrument to the Court of First Instance instead of presenting them to the office of the register of deeds, together with a motion that the same be considered in relation with the application, and the court, after notice to the parties, shall order such land registered subject to the encumbrance created by said instrument, or order the decree of registration issued in the name of the buyer of the person to whom the property has been conveyed by said instrument. . . ." (Emphasis ours.)

    Secondly, in the exercise of its jurisdiction over this cadastral case, the lower court, as a cadastral court or a court of land registration, has limited authority. It cannot determine whether Exhibit F reflects or not the true agreement between the parties thereto or whether the execution thereof is tainted with fraud. Much less may it render judgment for the payment of a sum of money, for the use and occupation of the land in question. Obviously, these matters should be the subject of an ordinary action and are beyond the province of a cadastral case.

    Referring to the second assignment of error, appellants maintain that inasmuch as payments on account of the balance of P600 due from Aquino, pursuant to Exhibit F began in March, 1938, he could not have paid more than P220, before Anselmo Molino died in December, 1939, and that the lower court erred, therefore, in finding that Anselmo had sold the lot in dispute to Aquino by virtue of Exhibit F. Commenting thereon, the lower court correctly said:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "Considering that Appendix F is a deed of sale of the land in question, the title to said land, with respect to the parties thereto, passed to the purchaser the moment it was executed, no matter whether or not portions of the purchase price payable in installments have been paid or not."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Wherefore, the order appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against the appellants. It is so ordered.

    Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Reyes, J. B. L., Endencia and Felix, JJ., concur.

    Endnotes:



    * 78 Phil., 809.

    G.R. No. L-8317   May 23, 1958 - GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JUAN ABAD, ET AL. <br /><br />103 Phil 725


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED