G.R. No. L-19096. February 29, 1964
CARLOS B. SIY, PETITIONER AND APPELLEE, VS. TAN GUN GA, ELISA SY, SANTIAGO SIY, ET AL., OPPOSITORS AND APPELLANTS.
LABRADOR, J.:
that an order be issued directing the Register of Deeds of Manila to
delete from the face of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 60008 the
words “for the land; and 2. Tan Gun Ga, widow, Elisa Siy, single,
Santiago Siy, single, Lopez Siy Uy, single, Ofelia Siy, single, Chinese
citizens, for the Improvement”, and to annotate at the back of said
title the fact that the improvements existing thereon belong to the
above-named persons, Chinese citizens. Petitioner is the registered
owner of the parcel of land, known as Lot 12, Block 1865, District of
San Nicolas, Manila, covered by said Transfer Certificate of Title
No. 60008 of the Register of Deeds of Manila, On the face of the said
title after the words “is registered in the name of appear the
following statement or words:
“1. CARLOS B. SIY, married to Hon Sran Ty, Filipino
citizen, for the land; and 2. TAN GUN GA, widow, Elisa Siy, single,
SANTIAGO SIY; single, LOPEZ SIY UY, single, OFELIA SIY, single, Chinese
citizens, for the Improvements;”
It is alleged as a reason for the petition that the appearance of
the names of the owners of the improvements on the face of the title is
misleading; so he prayed that the names of the owners of the
improvements, as such, be annotated at the back of the title.
The petition was set for hearing on July 15, 1961. It contained, at
the bottom, a statement that copy of the petition was furnished to all
parties by registered mail. On the day set for the hearing the owners
of the improvements did not appear. After the hearing the court
declared the petition meritorious and granted it. So it ordered the
Register of Deeds to delete the words indicated in the petition from
the face of the title and to annotate at the back of said title the
fact that the improvements existing in the land belong to the persons
named as owners thereof on the face of the title. This order is dated
July 22, 1961. On July 28, 1961 the owners of the improvements moved
for the reconsideration of the order, alleging that they were not given
timely notices of the petition, because they received notice of the
petition only on July 14, whereas the hearing was held on July 15; and
that the petition is groundless and unnecessary. This motion for
reconsideration was denied; so the oppositors appealed from the order
granting the petition.
The motion for reconsideration is under oath and it is to the effect
that the oppositor-appellant Tan Gun Ga who had been receiving all
papers relative to the case received copy of the notice for the hearing
only on July 14, 1961, one day before the hearing. He and his
co-oppositors-appellants, therefore, did not have the three days notice
of all motions, there being no fact of record showing otherwise. On
this ground alone the order appealed from is subject to reconsideration.
As to the merits of the petition and the objection thereto, we find
that the opposition to the petition is well-founded. In the first
place, the back of a certificate of title under the Torrens system is
intended, as the heading at the back expressly states, for the Memorandum of Encumbrances.
A building on a piece of land is not an encumbrance of the land. What
is considered an encumbrance is a mortgage existing on the land, or’
any other obligation for which the land is made to respond.
Furthermore, a building on a land is, under the Civil Law, real
property itself, and if attached permanently on the land becomes part
of the land. The face of the certificate of title is, therefore, the
place on which the names of the owners of the building or improvement
should be stated, not the back of the title which is reserved for the
encumbrances.
Wherefore, the order appealed from is hereby reversed and set aside
and the petition denied. With costs against petitioner-appellee.
So ordered.
Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Concepción, Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur.