ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 132068. January 31, 2000]

HEIRS OF FRANCISCO K. REDOR, et al. vs. CA, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 31 2000.

G.R. No. 132068 (Heirs of Francisco K. Redor, namely, Angelita D. Redor, Rolando C. Redor, Mercedita R. Fox, Marietta R. Gregorio, Violeta R. Bautista and Francisco Redor, Jr., represented by Francisco Redor, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, Norma D. Bernardo, Carmen Dimaranan, Corazon D. Miranda, Benito Chua, Register of Deeds of Quezon City and Land Registration Authority.)

This is a petition for review on certiorari to nullify and set aside the Decision dated 8 July 1997 of the Court of Appeals which affirmed the Order of the Regional Trial Court, Br. 89 of Quezon City dismissing for lack of cause of action the complaint of petitioners for cancellation of title and annulment of sale with damages.

On 11 August 1994 petitioners instituted Civil Case No. Q-94-21348 against private respondents. In their complaint petitioners substantially alleged:

(a) The parcel of land, subject of the complaint, is located at Bonifacio Street, Balingasa, Balintawak, Quezon City. The late Francisco Redor, Sr. transferred his rights and interest over this property to his heirs, herein petitioners, represented by Francisco Redor, Jr.;

(b) The decedent Redor, Sr. has a pending Insular Government Property Sales Application (IGPSA No. 1989 [1068]) over the land which application is awaiting final resolution by the Land Management Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR);

(c) On or about 1 December 1938, the land, then registered in the name of Eulogio Dimaranan under TCT No. 23810, was ordered forfeited in favor of the then Commonwealth of Philippines because it was used as a property bail bond in a criminal case where the accused jumped bail;

(d) on 13 October 1938 Valentina Rivera, the common-law wife of Eulogio, also filed an IGPSA over the disputed land with the Bureau of Lands but she eventually sold all her rights, interests and participation over the realty in favor of Redor, Sr. and his wife on 5 May 1959;

(e) On 1 July 1983 then Ministry of Natural Resources issued an order approving the transfer of rights and interest over the land from Valentina Rivera to Redor, Sr;

(f) On 3 October 1986, upon petition of the Director of Lands thru the Office of the Solicitor General, the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Br. 83, ordered the Register of deeds to cancel TCT No. 23810 in the name of Eulogio Dimaranan and in lieu thereof to issue another transfer certificate of title in the name of the Republic of the Philippines;

(g) Intriguingly, despite the order, the Register of Deeds never issued a title in the name of the Republic;

(h) On 8 December 1993, when the IGPSA No. 1989 of Redor, Sr. was about to be approved, the heirs of Eulogio and Valentina Dimaranan belatedly filed a protests against the application;

(i) Subsequently, on a chance verification with the Quezon City Register of Deeds, Redor, Jr. discovered that on 9 March 1994 Valentina Rivera, thru Norma Dimaranan Bernardo, filed a fraudulent petition for reconstitution of title with the Land Registration Authority (LRA), attaching therewith an expertly falsified TCT No. 143840 allegedly in the name of Valentina Rivera. The petition for reconstitution claimed that the original copy of TCT No. 143840 in the name of Valentina Rivera was lost/destroyed in the fire which gutted the Register of Deeds of Quezon City on 11 June 1988;

(j) Barely six (6) days later from the date of filing of the petition for reconstitution or on 15 March 1994 the LRA issued an order directing the Register of Deeds of Quezon City to reconstitute TCT No. 143840. As a result, the old title (TCT No. 143840) was cancelled and in lieu thereof a reconstituted title, TCT No. RT-143840, was issued by the Register of Deeds on 8 April 1994; and

(k) On 12 May 1994 a Deed of Sale allegedly executed by Valentina Rivera in favor of her daughter Norma Bernardo, was registered and annotated at the back of TCT No. RT-143840. Thus, the fraudulently reconstituted title was cancelled and TCT No. 107925, now in the name of Norma Bernardo, was issued by the Register of Deeds. Norma Bernardo then sold the disputed land to Benito Chua, the latter being fully aware that the land he purchased was the subject of a pending IGPSA. A new TCT No. 112259 was issued in his name.

In their complaint petitioners prayed for the annulment of the sale between Norma Bernardo and Benito Chua and the cancellation of the TCTs issued in the names of Benito Chua, Norma Bernardo and Valentina Rivera.

Norma Bernardo, Corazon Miranda and Benito Chua filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss arguing that petitioners' complaint stated no cause of action for the reasons that the subject land was not part of the public domain and that petitioners did not establish ownership thereof. For his part Benito Chua maintained that petitioners had no vested right over the realty, that they were not the real parties in interest and that he was a buyer in good faith.

In granting the Motion to Dismiss the trial court reasoned that upon the allegations in the complaint, "it stands out x x x that reliance by the plaintiffs (petitioners) in their complaint as to their cause of action against the defendants (private respondents) vis-�-vis the land in question, upon the pending Insular Government Property Application (IGPSA) No. 1989 (E-1068 of Francisco K. Redor, Sr. which he left to his heirs at the time of his death." By alleging in their complaint that Redor Sr., upon his death, left his rights and interest, petitioners were in fact simply and actually stating that they inherited only their father's right to his pending IGPSA over the land and nothing more. The right of Redor, Sr. at the time of his death, not being then a vested right since his IGPSA was awaiting resolution, did not operate to bestow upon them any title as to qualify them as real parties in interest in the instant suit.

The Court of Appeals sustained the trial court. Hence this petition which we find devoid of merit.

We are in full agreement with the appellate court that petitioners have not established their ownership or any vested right over the disputed land as to clothe them with the legal capacity to institute the action for cancellation of titles. The averment in the complaint that the late Francisco Redor, Sr. merely had a pending IGPSA clearly shows that the deceased had acquired no title over the land in question which he could validly transmit to his heirs. The inescapable conclusion therefore is that petitioners, as heirs of Redor, Sr., also did not acquire any vested right over the property. As correctly observed by the Court of Appeals, if there is anyone whose right was affected by the sale between Benito Chua and Norma Bernardo, it is the Republic of the Philippines. As earlier noted, the disputed land was forfeited in favor of the Government when the same was used as a property bond in a criminal case where the accused jumped bail.

ACCORDINGLY, in view of the foregoing, the petition is DENIED for lack of merit. Costs against petitioners.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) TOMASITA M. DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE