Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2000 > March 2000 Decisions > G.R. Nos. 104769 & 135016 March 3, 2000 - AFP MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 104769. March 3, 2000.]

AFP MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, SOLID HOMES, INC., INVESTCO, INC., and REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MARIKINA, Respondents.

[G.R. No. 135016. March 3, 2000.]

SOLID HOMES, INC., Petitioner, v. INVESTCO, INC. substituted by AFP MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATION, INC., Respondents.

D E C I S I O N


PARDO, J.:


The above cases were consolidated 1 and are thus jointly decided. The first case (G.R. No. 104769) is an appeal via certiorari taken by AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. (AFP MBAI for short) from the decision of the Court of Appeals the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:chanrobles virtuallawlibrary:red

"WHEREFORE, the Decision appealed from is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE insofar as it orders appellant AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. to pay plaintiff appellee exemplary damages; and AMENDED by reducing the nominal damages to P10,000.00, and ordering the private defendants to pay the costs instead of treble costs. Furthermore, the Clerk of Court of the court a quo is hereby instructed to reassess and determine the additional filing fee that should be paid by plaintiff considering the total amount awarded and to require plaintiff-appellee to pay the deficiency, if any.

"In all other respect, the Decision is hereby AFFIRMED.

"SO ORDERED." 2

The second case (G.R. No. 135016), is an appeal via certiorari interposed by Solid Homes, Inc. (hereafter Solid Homes) from the decision of the Court of Appeals, the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition for review is hereby DISMISSED. The appealed order of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City is hereby AFFIRMED in toto."cralaw virtua1aw library

"SO ORDERED." 3

The facts are as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Prior to September 7, 1976, Investco, Inc. was the owner of six (6) parcels of raw land, located in Quezon City and Marikina (Metro Manila, now a City), registered under titles in the names of its predecessors-in-interests, Angela Perez-Staley and Antonio Perez, Jr.

On September 7, 1976, Investco, Inc. agreed to sell the six (6) parcels of land to Solid Homes for P 10,211,075.00, payable in installments from July 22, 1977 to January 22, 1983. Among other terms, the parties agreed that Solid Homes would pay the amount of P100,000.00 as down payment upon execution of the contract; that Solid Homes would pay P1,942,215.00 as additional down payment on July 22, 1977, October 22, 1977, and January 22, 1978; and that Solid Homes would pay the balance of P8,188.860.00 in ten (10) semi-annual installments for a period of five (5) years, with interest at twelve (12%) percent per annum. The first installment was due on July 22, 1978. Paragraph 2 of the contract stipulates that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Should the (Vendee) fail to pay any of the installments on the due date thereof, he shall pay interest on the installment due at the rate of 1% per month for a total period of only two months or pro rata thereof, and should the (Vendee) still fail to pay the installment due including interest after the grace period of two months, the entire balance of the purchase price agreed upon shall become immediately due and demandable, and the (Vendee) shall pay the same within a period of thirty (30) days from the expiration of the grace period, without the need for judicial action on the part of the (Vendor)."cralaw virtua1aw library

The parties further agreed that Solid Homes would evict the squatters in the property or obtain a waiver from them, that it would cause the original titles to be cancelled and new ones issued in the name of Investco, Inc. and that Investco, Inc. would contribute one-half of the expenses in clearing the property of occupants, in an amount not exceeding P350,000.00. On or about March 28, 1979, the Register of Deeds of Marikina issued in favor of Investco, Inc. Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. 36518, 36680, 36681, 36682, 36683 and 36684 covering the Marikina portion of the property. The contract of sale to Solid Homes was not registered with the Registry of Deeds of Marikina nor annotated on the original titles issued in the name of Investco, Inc.

However, after paying the amount of P2,042,215.00 corresponding to the downpayment, and the amount of P4,084,430.00 representing the first four (4) semi-annual installments and a portion of the fifth installment, Solid Homes made no further payment to Investco, Inc. after February 19, 1981. The postdated checks issued by Solid Homes to Investco, Inc. intended for the remaining installments were dishonored, leaving a balance of P4,300,282.91 due under the contract in Investco, Inc.’s favor.

On March 13, 1981, Investco, Inc. and its predecessors-in interests Angela Perez-Staley and Antonio Perez, Jr. filed with the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Pasig, Branch 26 an action for specific performance and damages against Solid Homes, Inc. 4 In the complaint, Investco, Inc. and co-plaintiffs sought to collect from Solid Homes, Inc. the sum of P4,800,282.91 representing the balance on the purchase price due under the contract, reimbursement of P350,000.00 representing Investco, Inc.’s contribution to the expenses for eviction of squatters and the further sum of P99,559.00 for science and transfer taxes, and actual and moral damages, including attorney’s fees.

On April 20, 1981, Solid Homes filed with the trial court an answer to Investco, Inc.’s complaint alleging that the purchase price under the contract was "not yet due" and that the former, in fact, exceeded the installment payments due thereon. Solid Homes prayed for dismissal of Investco, Inc.’s complaint, and interposed a counterclaim for the refund of its excess payments, moral damages in the sum of P500,000.00, and attorney’s fees of P20,000.00 "or in the sum equivalent to 10% of whatever amount is awarded in favor of defendant." 5

On September 20, 1984, Solid Homes filed with the Register of Deeds of Marikina a notice of lis pendens with reference to Civil Case No. 40615 requesting that the same be annotated on the titles in Investco, Inc.’s name. On the same date, the notice of lis pendens was recorded as Entry No. 117191 of the Primary Entry Book, Volume 14 of the Office of the Register of Deeds of Marikina, Metro Manila.chanrobles.com : law library

However, the notice of lis pendens was not actually annotated on the titles in the name of Investco, Inc.

On February 14, 1985, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of Investco, Inc. ordering Solid Homes to pay plaintiffs P4,800,282.91, representing the balance of the purchase price due under the contract, with interest thereon from February 23, 1981 until paid; P99,559.00 representing science and transfer taxes advanced by Investco to Solid Homes and P250,000.00 as attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation. 6

On May 27, 1985, the trial court ordered the original record transmitted to the appellate court in view of Solid Homes’ filing of a notice of appeal. 7

In the meantime, on April 23, 1984, Investco, Inc. offered to sell the property to AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. for P27,079,767.00, subsequently reduced to P24,000,000.00, payable in installments. Investco, Inc. Furnished AFP MBAI with certified true copies of the titles covering the Marikina property.

In June, 1984, AFP MBAI verified the titles with the Register of Deeds of Marikina, Metro Manila and found that copies of the titles that Investco, Inc. gave were genuine and faithful reproductions of the original titles on file with the Register of Deeds. AFP MBAI noted that there were no liens or encumbrances annotated on the titles.

Moreover, AFP MBAI, through its Real Estate Committee, made an ocular inspection of the property sometime in June and July, 1984 "to determine the nature of the property and its (metes) and bounds." During the inspection, AFP MBAI found that the Investco, Inc. property was undeveloped raw land "which is mostly cogonal, (with) few trees and shrubs . . . and bounded on one side by the Marikina River." 8 AFP MBAI confirmed the presence of squatter shanties numbering about twenty (20) to thirty (30). Except for a foot path used by the squatters, there was no development on the property.

After determining that the Investco property was suitable for the housing project of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and that the titles covering the same were "clean" and "genuine," AFP MBAI agreed to purchase the same from Investco, Inc. for the price of P24,000,000.00, payable in installments for a period of one (1) year.

On October 10, 1984, Investco, Inc. executed a "Deed of Absolute Sale" conveying the property to AFP MBAI for the price of P24,000,000.00, payable in installments until October 10, 1985. 9 Among other terms, Investco, Inc. warranted to AFP MBAI that "it has good and valid title over the properties subject of (the) sale and (that it) shall hold (AFP MBAI) free from any adverse claim of whatever nature and from liens and encumbrances of third parties." 10

In November, 1984, AFP MBAI again verified the records of the Register of Deeds of Marikina, Metro Manila and confirmed" (t)he absence of any lis pendens, adverse claims or any liens or encumbrance (on) the originals of the title(s) . . ." AFP MBAI also inquired from the Malacañang Legal Office, the Land Registration Commission, and the Metropolitan Trial Court of Marikina if there were cases and other problems concerning the property, but found no case involving either Investco, Inc. or the property pending with said court and offices. 11 AFP MBAI also obtained a certification from the Clerk of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Marikina that Investco, Inc. "has no pending case before (that) court." 12

In April, 1985, AFP MBAI completed its payments of the purchase price.

On April 26, 1985, the Register of Deeds of Marikina issued Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. N-104941, N-104942, N-104943, N-104944, N-104945 and N-104946 in the name of AFP MBAI. The titles issued were "clean" and contained no annotation of any lien, encumbrance, or adverse claim by a third party.

On November 28, 1985, Solid Homes commenced action 13 before the Regional Trial Court, Marikina, against the Register of Deeds, AFP MBAI and Investco, Inc. for "annotation of lis pendens and damages" with temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. In its verified complaint, Solid Homes prayed that (a) the register of Deeds be ordered to annotate on the titles registered in the name of Investco, Inc. the notice of lis pendens dated September 19, 1984 in relation to Civil Case No. 40615, and to carry over the same to the titles in the name of AFP MBAI; (b) alternatively, to declare AFP MBAI as a buyer in bad faith, bound by the judgment to be rendered in Civil Case No. 40615; and (c) AFP MBAI and Investco, Inc. be ordered to pay Solid Homes jointly and severally, unspecified amount of actual, moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney’s fees of P100,000.00 plus "ten (10%) percent of the total amount to be awarded to plaintiff." Solid Homes also prayed for an order to enjoin provisionally the Register of Deeds from registering any deed affecting the titles in derogation of Solid Homes’ rights under the contract executed between itself and Investco, Inc:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

In due time, AFP MBAI and Investco, Inc. filed with the trial court an answer to the complaint. After pre-trial and trial, on April 25, 1990, the trial court rendered decision holding that:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

"Accordingly, judgment is hereby rendered as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. Ordering defendant Register of Deeds for (sic) Marikina to annotate the Notice of Lis Pendens, dated September 19, 1984 regarding Civil Case No. 40615 on the titles registered in the name of defendant AFP MBAI, that is TCT Nos. 104941, 104942, 104943, 104944 and 104945 and 104946.

2. Declaring defendant AFP MBAI as a buyer in bad faith and accordingly bound by the final judgment in Civil Case No. 40615, RTC, Pasig, now CA-G.R. No. 13400.

3. Ordering defendant Investco, Inc., to pay plaintiff nominal damages in the amount of P200,000.00 and exemplary damages in the amount of P100,000.00.

4. Ordering defendant AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc., to pay plaintiff the amount of P50,000.00 as nominal damages and P50,000.00 as exemplary damages.

5. Ordering defendants Investco and AFP MBAI to pay attorney’s fees of P50,000.00 jointly and severally.

6. Dismissing the counterclaim of defendants.

7. Ordering private defendants to pay treble costs.

8. On the cross-claim of defendant AFP MBAI against defendant Investco, Inc., ordering the latter to reimburse the former the amount of P11,000.00 paid pursuant to the Deed of Absolute Sale presented for Registration, Exhibit "7." "SO ORDERED." 14

Aggrieved thereby, AFP MBAI appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals. 15

On November 29, 1992, the Court of Appeals rendered decision the dispositive portion of which is quoted in the opening paragraph of this decision.

On December 24, 1991, AFP MBAI filed with the Court of Appeals a motion for reconsideration of the decision, which Solid Homes opposed. On March 17, 1991, the Court of Appeals denied the motion. 16

Hence, this petition. 17

The issue raised is whether Solid Homes is entitled to the annotation of its notice of lis pendens on the titles of Investco, Inc. and AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc., in relation to Civil Case No. 40615 of the Regional Trial Court, Pasig and thereby be bound by the final judgment therein.

Basically, Solid Homes’ complaint was one for "annotation of lis pendens and other matters with prayer for restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction" against Investco, Inc. AFP MBAI and the Register of Deeds of Marikina, to cause the annotation of lis pendens in the titles of Investco, Inc. and AFP MBAI. Actually, therefore, the suit is to compel the Register of Deeds of Marikina to annotate the notice of lis pendens on the titles of AFP MBAI with a claim for damages against Investco, Inc. and AFP MBAI for depriving Solid Homes of its rights to the property as provided under the contract to buy and sell. In its verified complaint, Solid Homes alleged that "the act of defendant Register of Deeds in not causing the annotation of the lis pendens on the titles then registered in the name of defendant Investco, Inc. and in issuing titles in the name of defendant AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc., without carrying over the proper annotation of lis pendens are contrary to law." 18 On the basis of this allegation, it prayed for an order directing the Register of Deeds of Marikina "to cause the annotation" of the notice of lis pendens on the old and new titles.

Obviously, the Register of Deed’s obligation to annotate the notice of lis pendens is one that arises from law. 19 Hence, the action is actually one for mandamus to compel the performance of a clear legal duty. 20 There is no such action as one for "annotation of lis pendens," as Solid Homes sought in its complaint.

"Lis pendens is a Latin term which literally means a pending suit or a pending litigation while a notice of lis pendens is an announcement to the whole world that a particular real property is in litigation, serving as a warning that one who acquires an interest over the said property does so at his own risk, or that he gambles on the result of the litigation over the said property. It is but a signal to the intending buyer or mortgagee to take care or beware and to investigate the prospect or non-prospect of the litigation succeeding before he forks down his money." 21

A notice of lis pendens is not and can not be sought as a principal action for relief. "The notice is but an incident to an action, an extra-judicial one to be sure. It does not affect the merits thereof. It is intended merely to constructively advise, or warn, all people who deal with the property that they so deal with it at their own risk, and whatever rights they may acquire in the property in any voluntary transaction are subject to the results of the action, and may well be inferior and subordinate to those which may be finally determined and laid down therein." 22 The notice of lis pendens — that real property is involved in an action — is ordinarily recorded without the intervention of the court where the action is pending. 23 As a settled rule, notice of lis pendens may be annotated only where there is an action or proceeding in court which affects title to or possession of real property. 24

Under Presidential Decree No. 1529, known as the "Property Registration Decree of 1978", the Register of Deeds may deny registration of the notice of lis pendens, which denial may be appealed by the applicant en consulta (Section 10, paragraph 2) to the Commissioner of Land Registration. 25 Section 117 of P.D. No. 1529 provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"When the Register of Deeds is in doubt with regard to the proper step to be taken or memorandum to be made in pursuance of any deed, mortgage or other instrument present to him for registration, or where any party in interest does not agree with the action taken by the Register of Deeds with reference to any such instrument, the question shall be submitted to the Commissioner of Land Registration by the Register of Deeds, or by the party in interest thru the Register of Deeds.

"Where the instrument is denied registration, the Registration of Deeds shall notify the interested party in writing, setting forth the defects of the instrument or legal grounds relied upon, and advising him that if he is not agreeable to such ruling, he may, without withdrawing the documents from the Registry, elevate the matter by consulta within five days from receipt of notice of the denial of registration to the Commissioner of Land Registration.

"The Register of Deeds shall make a memorandum of the pending consulta on the certificate of title which shall be cancelled motu proprio by the Register of Deeds after final resolution or decision thereof, or before resolution, if withdrawn by petitioner.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

"The Commissioner of Land Registration considering the consulta and the records certified to him after notice to the parties and hearing, shall enter an order prescribing the step to be taken or memorandum to be made. His resolution of ruling in consultas shall be conclusive and binding upon all Register of Deeds, provided, that the party in interest who disagrees with the final resolution, ruling or order of the Commissioner relative to consultas may appeal to the Court of Appeals within the period and in the manner provided in Republic Act No. 5434."cralaw virtua1aw library

Here, the Register of Deeds of Marikina denied the annotation of the notice of lis pendens on the ground that the complaint in Civil Case No. 40615 was for collection of a sum of money and did not involve the titles to or possession of the subject property. 26 If Solid Homes did not agree with the denial of the Register of Deeds, it could appeal the same en consulta to the Commissioner of Land Registration. 27 The resolution of the Commissioner may then be appealed to the Court of Appeals, which has exclusive jurisdiction to decide the same, "within the period and in the manner provided in Republic Act No. 5434." 28

In its questioned decision, the Court of Appeals held that the action filed by Investco, Inc. against Solid Homes "is not exclusively for payment of the unpaid installments on the purchase price of the subject properties and damages, but also one for rescission of the contract to sell and to buy the subject properties executed by defendant Investco, Inc. in favor of (Solid Homes) which necessarily involves delivery of possession and ownership of the same." 29

We do not agree. This ruling conflicts with the final decision of the Supreme Court on the case. 30 What is more, in determining the nature of plaintiff’s (Investco, Inc.) action in Civil Case No. 40615 and defendant Solid Homes’ counterclaim thereto, the Court of Appeals went beyond the allegations in the complaint and ventured into speculation and conjecture. There is nothing in Investco’s complaint in Civil Case No. 40615 that even remotely suggests that Investco, Inc. has rescinded the contract, or that it sought the rescission of the sale as an alternative remedy. Specific performance and rescission are alternative remedies which a party may not avail himself of at the same time. 31

The nature of an action is determined by the allegations of the complaint. 32

Investco’s complaint was an action for collection of sums of money, damages and attorney’s fees 33 to recover from Solid Homes unpaid installments on the purchase price of the subject property. To emphasize, the case was an action for collection of unpaid installments on the purchase price of subject real property. In such case, the annotation of a notice of lis pendens on the titles of the property was not proper as the action was in personam. 34

Consequently, the doctrine of lis pendens is inapplicable to this case. The Register of Deeds of Marikina correctly denied the annotation of the notice of lis pendens on the titles of Investco, Inc. and the AFP MBAI. 35

Even on the basis of Solid Homes’ counterclaim, which is disregarded in determining the nature of the action, notice of lis pendens is improper as the counterclaim was also for sums of money — alleged excess payment and for damages — not one affecting title to or possession of real property. Such counterclaim did not convert the nature of the action into a real action involving title to or possession of subject property.

The rule that "all persons dealing with property covered by Torrens Certificate of Title are not required to go beyond what appears on the face of the title" 36 applies herein with full vigor. In the absence of anything to excite suspicion, the buyer is not obligated to look beyond the certificate to investigate the titles of the seller appearing on the face of the certificate. 37

"Good faith is always presumed, and upon him who alleges bad faith on the part of a possessor rests the burden of proof." 38 Here, Solid Homes alleged that Investco, Inc. and AFP MBAI "confederated with each other in entering into the aforementioned sale in order to deprive herein plaintiff (Solid Homes) of its rights over subject properties under the Contract to Sell and to Buy . . ." 39 However, Solid Homes adduced no evidence to prove such allegation of bad faith.

The conclusion is inevitable that contrary to the holding of the Court of Appeals, AFP MBAI was a purchaser in good faith and for value, and, consequently, acquired valid and indefeasible titles to the Investco, Inc. property.

Resultantly, we find the appeal via certiorari of Solid Homes 40 without merit. Its objective was to compel AFP MBAI to execute a deed of transfer of the titles to parcels of land originally covered by the agreement to buy and sell between Solid Homes, Inc. and Investco, Inc. and for Solid Homes to pay AFP MBAI, in substitution of Investco, Inc. the amount of P4,800,282.91 with interest thereon at one percent per month from March 22, 1982, until paid. Thus, if Solid Homes would succeed in its scheme in the case, it would unjustly enrich itself enormously, acquiring subject property now worth billions of pesos 41 for the measly sum of P4,800,282.91 with interest at one percent a month from March 22, 1982, which it was unable to pay Investco, Inc. in the first place.

Solid Homes’ claim is predicated on the assumption that AFP MBAI is a transferee pendente lite of Investco, Inc. of the subject parcels of land and bound by the result of the suit. 42 Such claim is not factually or legally correct. In the absence of a valid notice of lis pendens annotated in the titles, AFP MBAI is a buyer in good faith and for value, and thus acquired clean and valid titles to the property in question.

WHEREFORE, the Court:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

(1) In G.R. No. 104769, GRANTS the petition, and SETS ASIDE the Court of Appeals’ decision in CA-G.R. CV No. 27398 and, in lieu thereof, renders judgment:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

(a) dismissing the complaint in Civil Case No. 52999 of the Regional Trial Court, Pasig Branch 165;

(b) ordering the Register of Deeds of Marikina to cancel the notice of lis pendens annotated on Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. N-104941, N-104942, N-104943, N-104944, N-104945 and N-104946 of the Register of Deeds for Marikina, Metro Manila;chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

(c) Ordering respondent Solid Homes, Inc. to pay AFP MBAI P300,000.00 as attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation; and costs.

(2) In G.R. No. 135016, DENIES the petition, for lack of merit.

With costs against Solid Homes, Inc.

SO ORDERED.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Davide, Jr., C.J., Puno, Kapunan and Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. By Resolution adopted on October 21, 1998, Rollo, G.R. No. 135016, p. 241.

2. In CA-G.R. CV No. 27398, Decision promulgated on November 29, 1991, Imperial, J., ponente, Javellana and Guingona, JJ., concurring, Rollo, G.R. No. 104769, pp. 68-90.

3. In CA-G.R. SP No. 42386, promulgated July 31, 1998, Cosico, J., ponente, Rasul and Magtolis, JJ., concurring, Rollo, G.R. No. 135016, pp. 36-45.

4. Docketed as Civil Case No. 40615.

5. Petition, p. 8, Rollo, G.R. No. 104769, p. 15.

6. Petition, p. 9, Rollo, G.R. No. 104769, p. 16.

7. Docketed as CA-G.R. CV No. 13400.

8. TSN, February 23, 1990, Civil Case No. 52999, p. 16.

9. Exhibits "5" to "5-D", RTC Record, Civil Case No. 52999, pp. 296-300.

10. Exhibit "5-D", par. 2, Ibid., p. 300.

11. TSN, February 23, 1990, Civil Case No. 52999, pp. 11-12; TSN, March 1, 1990, Civil Case No. 52999, pp. 9-16; Exhibits "6" and "6-A", RTC Record, Civil Case No. 52999, pp. 301-302.

12. TSN, March 1, 1990, Civil Case No. 52999, p. 12.

13. Civil Case No. 52999.

14. Decision, RTC Record, Civil Case No. 52999, pp. 377-378.

15. Docketed as CA-G.R. CV No. 27398.

16. Petition, Annex "C", Rollo, G.R. No. 104769, pp. 91-92.

17. Petition filed on May 13, 1992, Rollo, G.R. No. 104769, pp. 8-64. On August 30, 1993, the Court gave due course to the petition, Rollo, G.R. No. 104769, p. 126.

18. Complaint, par. 11, RTC Record, Civil Case No. 52999. pp. 4-5.

19. P.D. No. 1529, Section 76 (formerly Act No. 496, Section 79).

20. Rule 65, Section 3, 1964 Revised Rules of Court.

21. People v. Regional Trial Court of Manila, 178 SCRA 299, 306-307 [1989]; Constantino v. Espiritu, 45 SCRA 557 [1972].

22. Magdalena Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 184 SCRA 325, 330 [1990].

23. Ibid.

24. Villanueva v. Court of Appeals, 281 SCRA 298, 311 [1997], citing Diño v. Court of Appeals, 213 SCRA 422 [1992].

25. Now Land Registration Authority.

26. TSN, October 20, 1989, Civil Case No. 52999, pp. 16-17, Republic v. Court of Appeals, 299 SCRA 199, 238 [1998]. See Solid Homes, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 235 SCRA 299, 300 [1994].

27. As provided under P.D. No. 1529, Section 117.

28. Superseded by Supreme Court Circular No. 1-91, dated February 27, 1991, now governed by Rule 43, 1997 Code of Civil Procedure, amended.

29. Decision, Rollo, G.R. No. 104769, pp. 82-83.

30. Solid Homes, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, supra, Note 26.

31. Article 1191, Civil Code; Tolentino, Civil Code of the Philippines, Vol. 4, 1997 Reprint, p. 181.

32. Union Bank of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, 290 SCRA 198, 218 [1998]; Ligon v. Court of Appeals, 294 SCRA 73, 84 [1998], citing Abad v. Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, 206 SCRA 567, 579 [1992]; Solid Homes, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 271 SCRA 157, 164 [1997].

33. Solid Homes, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, supra, Note 26.

34. Minute Resolution, G.R. No. 100437, March 30, 1992 cited in Martinez, Summary of 1992 Supreme Court Rulings, January to June 1992, pp. 1590-1591; Moran, Comments on the Rules of Court, Vol. I, 1995 ed. p. 577, citing Saavedra v. Martinez, 58 Phil. 767, 773 [1931]; Noblejas, Registration of Land Titles and Deeds, 1992 Revised Edition, p. 352, citing Biglangawa v. Constantino, 109 Phil. 168 [1960].

35. Resolution, G.R. No. 100437, March 30, 1992.

36. Vda. de Medina v. Cruz, 161 SCRA 36, 44 [1988].

37. Republic v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 209 SCRA 90, 101-102 [1992]:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

38. Article 527, Civil Code; Ford Philippines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 267 SCRA 320, 329 [1997]; Pleasantville Development Corp. v. Court of Appeals, 253 SCRA 10, 18 [1996].

39. Complaint, par. 15, RTC Record, Civil Case No. 52999, p. 5.

40. In G.R. No. 135016, Rollo, pp. 14-32.

41. With an area of 408,443 sq. m. located at Quezon City and Marikina, adjacent to Loyola Grand Villa and Capitol Hills Golf Club, acquired in 1985 by AFP MBAI for P24,000,000.00.

42. In Civil Case No. 40615. This case was finally decided against Solid Homes’ claim (Solid Homes, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, supra, Note 26). Entry of Judgment was made on October 20, 1994.




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






March-2000 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 104930 March 1, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEX K BELLO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111928 March 1, 2000 - ALMARIO SIAPIAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116464 March 1, 2000 - RODENTO NAVARRO, ET AL v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117691 March 1, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO B. SAMPIOR

  • G.R. Nos. 119958-62 March 1, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEJANDRO MARQUITA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 124895 March 1, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBEN DE LOS REYES

  • G.R. No. 134286 March 1, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LORETO AMBAN

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-99-1184 March 2, 2000 - AMPARO S. FARRALES, ET AL. v. RUBY B. CAMARISTA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1454 March 2, 2000 - NESCITO C. HILARIO v. CRISANTO C. CONCEPCION

  • G.R. Nos. 115239-40 March 2, 2000 - MARIO C.V. JALANDONI v. FRANKLIN M. DRILON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125332 March 2, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HERACLEO MONTE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126212 March 2, 2000 - SEA-LAND SERVICE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126814 March 2, 2000 - JUDY CAROL L. DANSAL, ET AL. v. GIL P. FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127718 March 2, 2000 - NATIONAL FEDERATION OF LABOR v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 128360 March 2, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDGAR CRISPIN

  • G.R. No. 128677 March 2, 2000 - SANTIAGO ABAPO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 133343-44 March 2, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ILDEFONSO BAYONA

  • G.R. Nos. 104769 & 135016 March 3, 2000 - AFP MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120656 March 3, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARNEL FERDINAND A. OMAR

  • G.R. No. 126021 March 3, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENE SIAO

  • G.R. No. 135802 March 3, 2000 - PRISCILLA L. TAN v. NORTHWEST AIRLINES

  • G.R. No. 108381 March 7, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMADEO I. ACAYA

  • G.R. No. 108951 March 7, 2000 - JESUS B. DIAMONON v. DOLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109992 March 7, 2000 - HEIRS OF THE LATE HERMAN REY SANTOS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110899 March 7, 2000 - ELIZARDO D. DITCHE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115192 March 7, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELMER D. SALAS

  • G.R. No. 128046 March 7, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAMON CHUA UY

  • G.R. No. 128102 March 7, 2000 - AZNAR BROTHERS REALTY COMPANY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129644 March 7, 2000 - CHINA BANKING CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138291 March 7, 2000 - HECTOR C. VILLANUEVA v. UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS BANK

  • G.R. Nos. 139573-75 March 7, 2000 - JUNE GENEVIEVE R. SEBASTIAN v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 96-1-25-RTC March 8, 2000 - REPORT ON THE FINANCIAL AUDIT IN RTC

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1446 March 9, 2000 - CONCERNED EMPLOYEES OF THE RTC OF DAGUPAN CITY v. ERNA FALLORAN-ALIPOSA

  • G.R. No. 111174 March 9, 2000 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. BERNARDO V. SALUDARES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111806 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN G. GALANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 114299 & 118862 March 9, 2000 - TRADERS ROYAL BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 116044-45 March 9, 2000 - AMERICAN AIRLINES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 116084-85 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DAMASO JOB

  • G.R. No. 118216 March 9, 2000 - DELTAVENTURES RESOURCES v. FERNANDO P. CABATO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120060 March 9, 2000 - CEBU WOMAN’S CLUB v. LORETO D. DE LA VICTORIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121348 March 9, 2000 - ANGELITO P. DELES v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121998 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORICO CLEOPAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125233 March 9, 2000 - Spouses ALEXANDER and ADELAIDA CRUZ v. ELEUTERIO LEIS

  • G.R. No. 126125 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARMANDO GAVIOLA

  • G.R. No. 126210 March 9, 2000 - CRISTINA PEREZ v. HAGONOY RURAL BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127439 March 9, 2000 - ALFREDO PAZ v. ROSARIO G. REYES

  • G.R. No. 127749 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BEN GAJO

  • G.R. No. 131925 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DARIO CABANAS CUAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132745 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO UGIABAN LUMANDONG

  • G.R. No. 133323 March 9, 2000 - ALBERTO AUSTRIA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 133345 & 133324 March 9, 2000 - JOSEFA CH. MAESTRADO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133382 March 9, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFREN MENDOZA

  • G.R. No. 135613 March 9, 2000 - ARTHUR V. VELAYO v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 99-9-11-SC March 10, 2000 - RE: DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST RICARDO BANIEL III

  • A.M. No. 99-9-12-SC March 10, 2000 - ROSA J. MENDOZA v. RENATO LABAY

  • G.R. No. 127845 March 10, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LODRIGO BAYYA

  • G.R. No. 127673 March 13, 2000 - RICARDO S. MEDENILLA, ET AL. v. PHIL. VETERANS BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130769 March 13, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CHRISTOPHER GEGUIRA

  • G.R. No. 132624 March 13, 2000 - FIDEL M. BAÑARES II, ET AL. v. ELIZABETH BALISING, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140179 March 13, 2000 - ROQUE FERMO v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1443 March 14, 2000 - EVAN B. CALLEJA v. RAFAEL P. SANTELICES

  • G.R. No. 109271 March 14, 2000 - RICARDO CASTILLO, ET AL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110524 March 14, 2000 - DOUGLAS MILLARES, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123509 March 14, 2000 - LUCIO ROBLES, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133778 March 14, 2000 - ENGRACE NIÑAL v. NORMA BAYADOG

  • G.R. No. 135087 March 14, 2000 - ALBERTO SUGUITAN v. CITY OF MANDALUYONG

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1544 March 15, 2000 - ROMEO DE LA CRUZ v. CARLITO A. EISMA

  • G.R. No. 124453 March 15, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSEPH PAMBID

  • G.R. No. 130602 March 15, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MICHAEL FRONDA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130809 March 15, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO HERNANDEZ

  • G.R. No. 131814 March 15, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO ARIZAPA

  • A.M. No. MTJ-99-1221 March 16, 2000 - JOSEFINA M. VILLANUEVA v. BENJAMIN E. ALMAZAN

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1542 March 16, 2000 - ROLANDO M. ODOÑO v. PORFIRIO G. MACARAEG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115949 March 16, 2000 - EVANGELINE J. GABRIEL v. SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 124372 March 16, 2000 - RENATO CRISTOBAL, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125536 March 16, 2000 - PRUDENTIAL BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126805 March 16, 2000 - PHILIPPINE AIRLINES INC. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 128550 March 16, 2000 - DIGITAL MICROWAVE CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129904 March 16, 2000 - GUILLERMO T. DOMONDON v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133226 March 16, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LOCSIN FABON

  • A.M. No. 99-8-286-RTC March 17, 2000 - REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES

  • A.M. Nos. RTJ-99-1484 (A) & 99-1484 March 17, 2000 - JOSELITO RALLOS, ET AL. v. IRENEO LEE GAKO JR.

  • G.R. No. 113433 March 17, 2000 - LUISITO P. BASILIO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115221 March 17, 2000 - JULIUS G. FROILAN v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. 116754 March 17, 2000 - MORONG WATER DISTRICT v. OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121780 March 17, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAMON SUMALDE, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 122510-11 March 17, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HERACLEO MANRIQUEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 124224 March 17, 2000 - NEW PACIFIC TIMBER & SUPPLY COMPANY v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 124526 March 17, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JIMMY SAPAL

  • G.R. No. 124874 March 17, 2000 - ALBERT R. PADILLA v. FLORESCO PAREDES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125059 March 17, 2000 - FRANCISCO T. SYCIP v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129284 March 17, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSALINO FLORES

  • G.R. No. 129297 March 17, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMULO SAN DIEGO

  • G.R. No. 131270 March 17, 2000 - PERFECTO PALLADA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 134504 March 17, 2000 - JOSELITO V. NARCISO v. FLOR MARIE STA. ROMANA-CRUZ

  • G.R. No. 134986 March 17, 2000 - CAMPO ASSETS CORP. v. CLUB X. O. COMPANY

  • G.R. No. 138218 March 17, 2000 - CLAUDIUS G. BARROSO v. FRANCISCO S. AMPIG, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 98-8-262-RTC March 21, 2000 - REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

  • A.M. No. 99-2-79-RTC March 21, 2000 - REQUEST of Judge IRMA ZITA MASAMAYOR v. RTC-Br. 52

  • G.R. Nos. 130568-69 March 21, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CHE CHUN TING

  • G.R. No. 130685 March 21, 2000 - FELIX UY, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133434 March 21, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BERNABE E. ADILA

  • A.C. No. 4807 March 22, 2000 - MANUEL N. CAMACHO v. LUIS MEINRADO C. PANGULAYAN, ET AL.

  • Adm. Case No. 5235 March 22, 2000 - FERNANDO C. CRUZ, ET AL. v. ERNESTO C. JACINTO

  • A.M. No. 00-1258-MTJ March 22, 2000 - Spouses CONRADO and MAITA SEÑA v. ESTER TUAZON VILLARIN

  • G.R. No. 122540 March 22, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NOEL SAPINOSO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123206 March 22, 2000 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132551 March 22, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE DEDACE

  • Adm. Case No. 4083 March 27, 2000 - LEONITO GONATO, ET AL. v. CESILO A. ADAZA

  • Adm. Matter No. P-96-1204 March 27, 2000 - MILA MARTINEZ v. ALEXANDER RIMANDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120150 March 27, 2000 - ADRIAN DE LA PAZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123560 March 27, 2000 - YU ENG CHO, ET AL. v. PAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS

  • G.R. No. 124118 March 27, 2000 - MARINO ADRIANO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127240 March 27, 2000 - ONG CHIA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. and COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 128073 March 27, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENE MAMALIAS

  • G.R. No. 130669 March 27, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILSON MITRA

  • G.R. No. 130722 March 27, 2000 - REYNALDO K. LITONJUA, ET AL. v. L & R CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 131074 March 27, 2000 - CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO BICHARA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132929 March 27, 2000 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135962 March 27, 2000 - METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. BEL-AIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION

  • G.R. No. 136478 March 27, 2000 - ARSENIO P. REYES, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1528 March 28, 2000 - ROMULO SJ TOLENTINO v. ALFREDO A. CABRAL

  • G.R. No. 79679 March 28, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ENRIQUE CABINGAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 117145-50 & 117447 March 28, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONIDA MERIS

  • G.R. No. 131472 March 28, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO TIPAY

  • G.R. No. 132518 March 28, 2000 - GAVINA MAGLUCOT-AW, ET AL. v. LEOPOLDO MAGLUCOT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133146 March 28, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANUEL CULA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133832 March 28, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ZOSIMO BARREDO

  • A.M. No. P-98-1284 March 30, 2000 - ABRAHAM D. CAÑA v. ROBERTO B. GEBUSION

  • G.R. No. 106671 March 30, 2000 - HARRY TANZO v. FRANKLIN M. DRILON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109773 March 30, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELBERTO BASE

  • G.R. No. 123112 March 30, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARTURO CAVERTE and TEOFILO CAVERTE

  • G.R. No. 125355 March 30, 2000 - CIR v. COURT OF APPEALS and COMMONWEALTH MANAGEMENT AND SERVICES CORP.

  • G.R. No. 129288 March 30, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOEY AQUINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129433 March 30, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PRIMO CAMPUHAN

  • G.R. No. 138081 March 30, 2000 - BUREAU OF CUSTOMS (BOC), ET AL. v. NELSON OGARIO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-98-1167 March 31, 2000 - EMILY M SANDOVAL. v. FELICISIMO S. GARIN

  • A.M. No. P-96-1211 March 31, 2000 - PACIFICO S. BULADO v. DOMINGO TIU

  • G.R. No. 100152 March 31, 2000 - ACEBEDO OPTICAL COMPANY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114734 March 31, 2000 - VIVIAN Y. IMBUIDO v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115181 March 31, 2000 - MARIA SOCORRO AVELINO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115990 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSELITO BALTAZAR y ESTACIO @ "JOEY"

  • G.R. No. 121517 March 31, 2000 - RAY U. VELASCO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121572 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOEL ELAMPARO

  • G.R. No. 123113 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JERRY ABALDE

  • G.R. No. 123636 March 31, 2000 - JOSELITO LAGERA v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125280 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILSON SUITOS

  • G.R. Nos. 128056-57 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCOS PARAMIL

  • G.R. No. 128647 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO SALONGA

  • G.R. No. 132053 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO TAYAG

  • G.R. No. 132192 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGELIO NOROÑA and FREDDIE NOROÑA

  • G.R. Nos. 133387-423 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EXPEDITO ABAPO

  • G.R. No. 133857 March 31, 2000 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOEY AMIGABLE

  • G.R. No. 139137 March 31, 2000 - ALFREDO ARQUELADA, ET AL v. PHIL. VETERANS BANK