Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1994 > September 1994 Decisions > G.R. No. 104372 September 26, 1994 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 104372. September 26, 1994.]

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS and NORMA VARGAS CONJARES, represented by ESTER TAMAYO, Respondents.


D E C I S I O N


VITUG, J.:


This petition for review on certiorari, instituted by the Republic of the Philippines, assails the decision, dated 24 February 1992, of respondent appellate court, affirming that of the court a quo, which orders the reconstitution of a Transfer Certificate of Title ("TCT") in favor of private Respondent.

On 21 August 1989, private respondent Norma Vargas Conjares, through her attorney-in-fact Ester Tamayo, filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court ("RTC"), Fourth Judicial Region, Branch 17, of Cavite City, for reconstitution of the original and owner’s duplicate of TCT No. T-6583 of the Register of Deeds for the province of Cavite.

The late Benita Soriano and Juan Vargas were the alleged registered owners of a parcel of land (Lot 1139-B of the subdivision plan Psd-37865), situated in Tanza, Cavite, with an area of twenty five thousand four hundred sixty five (25,465) square meters, covered by TCT No. T-6583 of the Registry of Deeds for the province of Cavite. Private Respondent Norma Vargas Conjares acquired, on 02 November 1982, the property by virtue of a Deed of Extrajudicial Partition executed among the heirs of Benita Soriano. The owner’s duplicate copy of TCT No. T-6583 was said to have been lost in the course of the transfer of Conjares and her family from their former residence to their new address at Tandang Sora, Quezon City. All efforts to find the TCT proved to be futile. Tamayo’s inquiries with the Office of the Register of Deeds regarding the status of the original file copy of TCT No. T-6583 likewise produced negative results. Presumably, the title was among the records destroyed when the Old Provincial Capitol Building, which then housed the Office of the Register of Deeds, was razed by fire on 07 June 1959. Private respondent submitted, among other papers, a copy of the subdivision plan Psd-37865, with the corresponding technical description of Lot 1139-B, shown to have been approved by the Director of Lands on 04 June 1953. The subject parcel appeared to have been declared for taxation purposes in the name of Benita Soriano.chanrobles law library : red

After trial, the RTC granted the petition. It accordingly adjudged, as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"WHEREFORE, finding the petition to be well-taken, the court hereby grants the same and orders the Register of Deeds of Cavite Province, after petitioner’s payment of the prescribed legal fees, to reconstitute the original of TCT No. T-6583 in the name of Benita Soriano on the basis of plan Psd-37865 and the corresponding technical description of Lot 1139-B (Exh. F and I) duly approved by the Land Registration Authority; and to issue in favor of the petitioner a corresponding new owner’s duplicate copy of TCT No. T-6583, hereby declaring as null and void the missing original file copy and the old owner’s duplicate copy lost by the petitioner. The reconstituted original and duplicate copies shall be given like faith and credit as the ones lost and shall be regarded as such for all legal intents and purposes.

"SO ORDERED." 1

The Solicitor General, representing the Republic of the Philippines, herein petitioner, appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals mainly on the thesis that since the required publication for the initial hearing on the petition had not been met, the RTC could not be said to have acquired jurisdiction over the case. Petitioner observed that private respondent merely submitted to the court a certificate of publication issued by the National Printing Press. The two issues (30 October 1989 and 06 November 1989) of the Official Gazette, however, where the notices supposedly appeared, were not presented in Court. In any case, petitioner averred, the certificate of publication indicated that the 06 November 1989 issue of the Official Gazette was released for circulation only on 14 November 1989, or merely twenty-one (21) days prior to the initial hearing on 06 December 1989.chanrobles law library : red

On 24 February 1992, respondent appellate court decided thusly:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"The Certificate of Publication issued by the Director of the National Printing Press Office, stated that the order of the court a quo, dated August 22, 1989, was published in Volume 85 Nos. 44 and 45, October 30, and November 6, 1989 issues of the Official Gazette.

"The November 6, 1989 issue was released for circulation on November 14, 1989, and although the second issue was released for circulation on November 14, 1989, 22 days prior to the scheduled date of initial hearing on December 6, 1989, short of the 30 days requirement of publication, there is substantial compliance with the law. The first issue dated October 30, 1989 was released for publication 30 days prior to the initial hearing.

"It must be noted that the purpose of the publication of the notice of the petition for reconstitution in the Official Gazette, is to apprise the whole world that such petition has been filed. The publication of the second notice of initial hearing 22 days prior to the date of the scheduled hearing is sufficient compliance, in order to notify the parties interested thereto, that such petition for reconstitution of title has been filed.

x       x       x


"Petitioner, having substantially complied with the requirements of Section 13 of R.A. 26, no reversible error was committed by the court a quo in granting the petition.

"WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Order appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED. No pronouncement as to costs.

"IT IS SO ORDERED." 2

Hence, the instant petition.

We rule for the Republic.

Section 13, Republic Act No. 26 3 provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SEC. 13. The court shall cause a notice of the petition, filed under the preceding section, to be published, at the expense of the petitioner, twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette, and to be posted on the main entrance of the provincial building and of the municipal building of the municipality or city in which the land is situated, at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing. The court shall likewise cause a copy of the notice to be sent, by registered mail or otherwise, at the expense of the petitioner, to every person named therein whose address is known, at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing. Said notice shall state, among other things, the number of the lost or destroyed certificate of title, if known, the name of the registered owner, the names of the occupants or persons in possession of the property, the owners of the adjoining properties and all other interested parties, the location, area and boundaries of the property, and the date on which all persons having any interest therein must appear and file their claim or objections to the petition. The petitioner shall, at the hearing, submit proof of the publication, posting and service of the notice as directed by the court."cralaw virtua1aw library

In a number of cases, 4 this Court has already laid down the rule that the requirements of Republic Act No. 26 are indispensable and must be strictly complied with. In Register of Deeds of Malabon v. Regional Trial Court, 5 we held that the publication of the notice of hearing in the Official Gazette at least thirty (30) days prior to the initial hearing of a petition for reconstitution is essential to confer jurisdiction upon the court. The rule was reiterated in the recent case of Republic of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals and the Philippine National Bank, 6 where this Court, in denying a similar petition for reconstitution of title, said:chanrobles.com:cralaw:red

"The jurisdictional requirement of publication of a petition for reconstitution of title, refers to the actual publication of the notice of initial hearing of the petition in two successive issues of the Official Gazette (with the required posting and notice by registered mail or otherwise to specified persons) and its release for circulation at least thirty (30) days before the scheduled hearing (Zuniga v. Hon. Vicencio, 153 SCRA 720). The purpose of such publication is to apprise the whole world that such a petition has been filed and that whoever is minded to oppose it for good cause may do so within thirty (30) days before the date set by the court for hearing the petition. It is the publication of such notice that brings in the whole world as a party in the case and vests the court with jurisdiction to hear and decide it (Register of Deeds of Malabon v. RTC of Malabon, M.M., Branch 170, 181 SCRA 788).

"The Certificate of Publication revealed that the August 28, 1989 Supplement issue of the Official Gazette was released for circulation on October 13, 1989, which was only seventeen (17) days before the scheduled hearing set by the court on October 30, 1989. Clearly, the jurisdictional requirement of publication in accordance with law had not been met, for the law specifically requires that the ‘court shall cause a notice of the petition to be published at the expense of the petitioner . . . at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing . . . .’ (Sec. 13, R.A. No. 26.).

"x       x       x"

To the same effect is our most recent pronouncement in Republic v. Court of Appeals and Delfina Dolor, G.R. No. 100995, 14 September 1994.

Accordingly, we have no other recourse than to grant in this case at bench the Republic’s opposition and to similarly set aside, for want of jurisdiction, the decision of the court a quo and that of the appellate court which affirmed it.chanrobles.com : virtual law library

WHEREFORE, the decision of respondent Court of Appeals, dated 24 February 1992, and the order of reconstitution, dated 07 March 1990, of the Regional Trial Court of Cavite (Branch 17), are hereby SET ASIDE. Costs against private Respondent.

SO ORDERED.

Feliciano, Romero and Melo, JJ., concur.

Bidin, J., is on leave.

Endnotes:



1. Rollo, pp. 39-40.

2. Rollo, pp. 35-36.

3. An Act Providing a Special Procedure for the Reconstitution of Torrens Certificate of Title Lost or Destroyed.

4. Republic v. Court of Appeals, 218 SCRA 778; Director of Lands v. Court of Appeals, Et Al., 102 SCRA 370; Caltex, Et. Al. v. CIR, Et Al., 23 SCRA 492.

5. 181 SCRA 788.

6. 218 SCRA 773, 779-780.




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






September-1994 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.M. No. MTJ-94-957 September 1, 1994 - CORAZON ALMA G. DE LEON v. TROADIO C. UBAY-UBAY

  • G.R. No. 83527 September 1, 1994 - JORGE ASPI, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89967 September 1, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANGELITO BAUTISTA

  • G.R. No. 106246 September 1, 1994 - CENTRAL NEGROS ELECTRIC COOP., INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106655 September 1, 1994 - DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106692 September 1, 1994 - MILA MANALO v. RICARDO GLORIA

  • G.R. No. 107075 September 1, 1994 - ARMANDO S. OLIZON v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 108310 September 1, 1994 - RUFINO O. ESLAO v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • G.R. No. 109761 September 1, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CARMELITA PUERTOLLANO COMIA

  • G.R. No. 113092 September 1, 1994 - MARTIN CENTENO v. VICTORIA VILLALON-PORNILLOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115044 September 1, 1994 - ALFREDO S. LIM, ET AL. v. FELIPE G. PACQUING, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86720 September 2, 1994 - MHP GARMENTS, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 102007 September 2, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGELIO C. BAYOTAS

  • G.R. No. 103047 September 2, 1994 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 103394 September 2, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERT N. REYES

  • G.R. No. 103584 September 2, 1994 - SUBO TANGGOTE v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106341 September 2, 1994 - DELFIN G. VILLARAMA v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. 94953 September 5, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARMANDO G. DE LARA

  • G.R. Nos. 105402-04 September 5, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOANES AGRAVANTE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105538 September 5, 1994 - FERROCHROME PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. 110995 September 5, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALVARO B. SAYCON

  • G.R. No. 66130 September 8, 1994 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. ISABEL TESALONA

  • G.R. No. 82490 September 8, 1994 - SEVERINO P. DE GUZMAN v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 98704 September 8, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARVEL SABALLE

  • G.R. No. 106370 September 8, 1994 - PHILIPPINE GEOTHERMAL, INC., v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

  • A.M. No. 93-9-249-CA September 12, 1994 - INRE: MARIA CORONEL

  • G.R. No. 92154 September 12, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SANTIAGO F. SERVILLON

  • G.R. No. 101383 September 12, 1994 - GAMALIEL B. PALMA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105813 September 12, 1994 - CONCEPCION M. CATUIRA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108525 September 13, 1994 - RICARDO AND MILAGROS HUANG v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108784 September 13, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ADJUTOR TANDUYAN

  • G.R. No. 100995 September 14, 1994 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 101262 September 14, 1994 - ALBERTO GARRIDO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108430 September 14, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO L. TIONGCO

  • G.R. No. 108824 September 14, 1994 - DENNIS C. LAZO v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. 103225 September 15, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FEDERICO BALANAG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106720 September 15, 1994 - ROBERTO AND THELMA AJERO v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 108493 September 15, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO R. DANIEL

  • A.M. No. RTJ-92-876 September 19, 1994 - STATE PROSECUTORS v. MANUEL T. MURO

  • G.R. Nos. 107732-32 September 19, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDGARDO G. MANUEL

  • G.R. No. 104276 September 20, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO A. ALAPIDE

  • G.R. No. 108494 September 20, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SAMUEL Z. MARRA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108878 September 20, 1994 - OLIVIA SEVILLA v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108914 September 20, 1994 - STAR ANGEL HANDICRAFT v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95013 September 21, 1994 - TRADE UNIONS OF THE PHILIPPINES/FEBRUARY SIX MOVEMENT v. BIENVENIDO LAGUESMA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100485 September 21, 1994 - SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION v. BIENVENIDO E. LAGUESMA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108670 September 21, 1994 - LBC EXPRESS, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110581 September 21, 1994 - TELENGTAN BROTHERS & SONS, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 93-9-1249-RTC September 22, 1994 - IN RE: REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MINDORO ORIENTAL

  • G.R. No. 95641 September 22, 1994 - SANTOS B. AREOLA v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 109145 September 22, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE D. CAPOQUIAN

  • G.R. No. 109783 September 22, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO MENDOZA

  • G.R. No. 105597 September 23, 1994 - LISANDRO ABADIA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106213 September 23, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISANTA G. SANTOS

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-91-758 September 28, 1994 - ERNESTO B. ESTOYA, ET AL. v. MARVIE R. ABRAHAM SINGSON

  • G.R. No. 55380 September 26, 1994 - INRE: FLAVIANO C. ZAPANTA v. LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR

  • G.R. No. 76925 September 26, 1994 - V.V. ALDABA ENGINEERING v. MINISTER OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 98149 September 26, 1994 - JOSE V. DEL ROSARIO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 99042 September 26, 1994 - BLOOMFIELD ACADEMY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 100391-92 September 26, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIANO TIMPLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 104357-58 September 26, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDWIN GO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 104372 September 26, 1994 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106705 September 26, 1994 - PHILIPPINE DAIRY PRODUCTS CORPORATION, ET AL. v. TITO F. GENILO

  • G.R. No. 107159 September 26, 1994 - AMADEO CUAÑO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107328 September 26, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFREN DULOS

  • G.R. No. 107349 September 26, 1994 - SUNFLOWER UMBRELLA MANUFACTURING CO., INC. v. BETTY U. DE LEON

  • G.R. Nos. 111416-17 September 26, 1994 - FELICIDAD UY v. MAXIMO C. CONTRERAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111471 September 26, 1994 - ROGELIO R. DEBULGADO v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • Adm. Case No. 3232 September 27, 1994 - ROSITA C. NADAYAG v. JOSE A. GRAGEDA

  • G.R. No. 64948 September 27, 1994 - MANILA GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB, INC. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT

  • G.R. No. 94570 September 28, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOMICIANO PERALTA

  • G.R. No. 97845 September 29, 1994 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NELIA N. CORONACION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115906 September 29, 1994 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-92-721 September 30, 1994 - JUVY N. COSCA, ET AL. v. LUCIO P. PALAYPAYON, JR.

  • G.R. No. 80887 September 30, 1994 - BLISS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION EMPLOYEES UNION , ET AL. v. PURA FERRER CALLEJA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111230 September 30, 1994 - ENRIQUE T. GARCIA, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.