FELICIDAD REYES-TALAG, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, VS. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF LAGUNA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE.

Reyes-Talag versus Register of Deeds of Laguna

The Case

This is a petition brought by Felicidad Reyes-Talag against the Register of Deeds of Laguna, asking the courts to compel that office to issue in her favor a new certificate of title covering a small parcel of land that had been carved out of a larger registered estate. The action is, in substance, a petition for the entry of a new certificate of title under the land registration law, and it matters because it shows how a registered owner or a person in interest may obtain judicial relief when the register of deeds refuses to act, and how the courts treat a transfer that was never embodied in a formal deed but was acknowledged and confirmed by the transferor and his heirs.

Procedural History

Felicidad Reyes-Talag filed her petition before the Court of First Instance of Laguna, praying for an order directing the Register of Deeds of Laguna to issue a new certificate of title in her favor over the 471 square meters of land. The Acting Register of Deeds answered, questioning the petition and suggesting that the matter should have been brought to the Land Registration Commission instead of the court. The trial court denied the petition, holding that the dispositive portion of the expropriation decision did not mention her ownership, that she was not a party to the expropriation case, that the acknowledgment of Numeriano Reyes was a private document and not a mode of conveying title to real property, that the provision on severance or consolidation of parcels did not apply, and that she had not satisfactorily shown that she owned the land. She moved for reconsideration, explaining that through oversight the acknowledgment had been presented without the page bearing the notarial acknowledgment, and asking that it be substituted with the complete public document. Upon denial of her motion for reconsideration, she appealed directly to the Supreme Court, questioning the propriety of the lower court's refusal to order the issuance of a new certificate under the circumstances.

Facts

Numeriano Reyes owned 18,755 square meters of land in San Pedro, Laguna, covered by Original Certificate of Title No. 187. In January 1959 the government, at the instance of the Land Tenure Administration, instituted expropriation proceedings over the land before the Court of First Instance of Laguna, for the purpose of subdividing it and reselling it to the bona fide occupants. In June 1959 the trial court declared the government's right to expropriate the land, with the exception of two lots, one containing 471 square meters and another containing 1,170 square meters, because these had already been sold, the first to Felicidad Reyes-Talag and the second to Jose Oliver. A copy of this decision was furnished to the Register of Deeds and annotated at the back of the certificate of title.

After Felicidad had the land surveyed, with the consent of the Land Tenure Administration, segregating the 471 square meters from the rest, she requested the Register of Deeds to issue her a new certificate of title covering her portion as mentioned in the judgment. The Acting Register of Deeds required her to produce the certificate of title covering the whole land. When she produced it, he asked for a document showing that the land was really transferred to her by Numeriano Reyes, and Numeriano Reyes himself confirmed the transfer in a public instrument. When Numeriano Reyes died in August 1962, she was also required to produce his certificate of death. Still not satisfied, the Register of Deeds required her to produce a deed of confirmation of the transfer by the heirs of Numeriano Reyes, and the heirs obliged by executing such a deed of confirmation in September 1964, signed by the widow in her own capacity and as guardian of the five minors, by an attorney-in-fact of the other three children, and by the six other children who were already of age. Despite the compliance with all his requirements, the Acting Register of Deeds still refused to issue a new certificate.

Felicidad Reyes-Talag is the daughter of Numeriano Reyes. None of the heirs opposed her petition; in their deed of confirmation they joined her in the request for the issuance of a new title, explaining that the land had been excluded from the property covered in the project of partition submitted in the intestate proceedings of their father's estate.

Issues

• Whether or not the decision in the expropriation case adjudicated the 471 square meters in favor of Felicidad Reyes-Talag, so that the trial court erred in saying that the dispositive portion did not mention her ownership.
• Whether or not the acknowledgment by Numeriano Reyes and the deed of confirmation by his widow and heirs sufficiently prove the transfer of the portion of land to Felicidad Reyes-Talag, despite the absence of a formal deed of transfer.
• Whether or not the issuance of a new certificate of title in her favor is authorized under the land registration law, even assuming that the provision on severance or consolidation of parcels does not apply.

Applicable Provisions

Section 112 of Act No. 496, the Land Registration Act, provides in its pertinent part:

Any registered owner or other person in interest may at any time apply by petition to the Court, upon the ground that registered interests of any description, whether vested, contingent, expectant or inchoate, have terminated and ceased; or upon any other reasonable ground.

This is the provision the Court invokes as the source of authority for ordering the entry of a new certificate of title in favor of the petitioner.

The same section further provides:

the entry of a new certificate

The Court relies on this clause to confirm that, after hearing, the court has the power to order the entry of a new certificate or to grant any other relief it may deem necessary and proper.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the lower court erred in stating that the expropriation decision contained no adjudication of the land in favor of Felicidad Reyes-Talag. The dispositive portion of that decision expressly excluded two lots from expropriation because the court found in the body of the decision that these had already been sold, one to Felicidad Reyes-Talag and the other to Jose Oliver. The portion in question was definitely left out of the expropriated land of which it formed part, and its owner, who built her home on it, had the right to see to it that her right is protected by a new certificate of title in her name.

On the second issue, the Court held that the acknowledgment by Numeriano Reyes and the deed of confirmation by the widow and heirs, with no opposition whatsoever, are enough, in justice to Felicidad Reyes-Talag, to prove the transfer of the portion of land to her. The Court also accepted her explanation of her oversight in presenting the acknowledgment without its notarial page, noting that the exhibit now on the records is a duly acknowledged document filed before the office of the Register of Deeds.

On the third issue, the Court held that even assuming, as the lower court held, that the provision on severance or consolidation of parcels does not apply, the issuance of a new certificate to Felicidad Reyes-Talag is authorized under Section 112 of Act No. 496. The Court quoted the provision allowing any registered owner or other person in interest to apply by petition upon any reasonable ground, and noted that the section expressly provides that after hearing the court has the power to order the entry of a new certificate or to grant any other relief it may deem necessary and proper. The Court concluded that the transfer, together with the presentation of the certificate of title covering the whole land, warrants the issuance of a new certificate of title in her favor over the 471 square meters already segregated by a new survey.

Doctrine

Under Section 112 of Act No. 496, any registered owner or other person in interest may at any time apply by petition to the court, upon any reasonable ground, for the entry of a new certificate of title, and after hearing the court may order the entry of a new certificate or grant any other relief it may deem necessary and proper. A transfer of a registered parcel need not be embodied in a formal deed where the transferor has acknowledged the transfer in a public instrument and his widow and heirs have confirmed it in a deed of confirmation, with no opposition from any interested party; such documents are sufficient to prove the transfer. Where an expropriation decision expressly excludes a lot from expropriation because it had already been sold to a named person, that person's ownership is adjudicated in the body of the decision, and the owner is entitled to a new certificate of title over the excluded portion.

Disposition

The order appealed from was reversed, and the Register of Deeds was ordered to issue a new certificate of title in favor of Felicidad Reyes-Talag over her 471 square meters of the land in question, with no costs.

Remember This

The single line worth memorizing is that Section 112 of the Land Registration Act empowers the court, upon petition of a registered owner or person in interest and upon any reasonable ground, to order the entry of a new certificate of title. Examiners like to use this case to test the remedy of a person in interest when the register of deeds refuses to issue a new certificate, and to test whether an informal but acknowledged and confirmed transfer can support the issuance of a new title.