Garcia vs. Reyes

45. Garcia vs.
Reyes
FACTS: Garcia, as attorney for Tomasa Galang, filed a petition in the latter’s name for
the registration of two parcels of land situated in San Agustin, Santa Ana, Pampanga.
After the proper proceedings the court rendered judgment adjudicating said two parcels
of land, together with the improvements thereon, to Tomasa Galang and decreeing the
registration thereof in her name, subject to an encumbrance consisting of a sale with
pacto de retro, executed by the applicant in favor of Juana Garcia for the term of five
years. Later, the proper order for the issuance of the decree was entered and thereafter,
the proper decree of registration, as well as the original certificate of title was issued.
Several encumbrances appear on the back of the original certificate of title. In the
motion of Valeriano Galang Et. Al., noted on the certificate of title, as has been said,
they prayed for the amendment of the decree of registration as well as of the proper
original certificate of title issued to Tomasa Galang. Juana Garcia, as mortgage creditor
of Tomasa Galang, filed an opposition to said motion. The respondent judge issued an
order overruling Juana Garcia’s opposition, granting the motion of Valeriano Galang Et.
Al., and ordering that a day be set for the introduction of evidence.
ISSUE/S: Whether or not the respondent judge had jurisdiction to order the amendment
of the decree of registration and the proper certificate of title five years after the
issuance thereof, the amendment consisting of the inclusion of coheirs as co-owners of
the registered property and their existing mortgage liens, with the consent of the original
registered owner but against the opposition of the mortgage creditor
RULING: No. In granting the motion for amendment, the respondent judge took into
consideration the consent of the original registered owner and the allegation that the
mortgage liens are fraudulent. Even then, there being a legal prohibition that a decree of
registration be reviewed after the expiration of one year from the issuance thereof for
any reason whatsoever, neither the consent of the originally registered owner, nor the
fact that some of the encumbrances were obtained by fraud, can authorize such
revision. The procedure to be followed, when a registered owner is agreeable to
including other co-owners in his title, is to have the portion or portions assigned to the
co-owners transferred in accordance with the provisions of the law and the transfer
registered in the registry of deeds and noted on the proper certificate of title and a new
title issued immediately, provided, of course, that there are no encumbrances noted on
the original certificate of title. If any encumbrance exists, even if it was obtained
fraudulently, such amendment cannot be made without the consent of the mortgagee,
for the annulment of the mortgage in so far as it affects the rights of the co-owners.
Moreover, the prohibition contained in section 112 of Act No. 496, that nothing be done
to injure the title or any other rights of the purchaser or mortgagee who may hold a
certificate by onerous title and in good faith — the purchaser and mortgagee are
synonymous according to section 38 of said Act No. 496 — does not necessarily imply
that when the mortgage lien was fraudulently obtained such amendment can be made;
because it is contrary to the prohibition contained in said sections 38 and 112 of Act No.
496, and deprives the mortgagee of a part of his security without giving him an
apportunity to be heard in his own defense, thus violating his constitutional right of not
being deprived of any property right without due process of law.
The respondent judge, then, in granting the motion to amend the decree of registration
issued to Tomasa Galang in proceeding No. 495 (G. R. L. O. Record No. 20966) and
the proper certificate of title No. 11585, filed by the respondents Valeriano Galang,
Aurelio Galang, Ambrosio Medina y Galang and Perpetua Galang y Garcia, as alleged
coheirs of Tomasa Galang, five years after the issuance of said decree of registration
and certificate of title over the objection of the petitioner Juana Garcia, as registered
mortgage creditor of the only registered owner Tomasa Galang, although with the
consent of the latter, exceeded his jurisdiction, violating the conclusive provisions of
sections 38 and 112 of Act No. 496, which prohibit the revision of a decree of
registration after the period of one year from the time of its issuance.

Garcia vs. Reyes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Garcia vs. Reyes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Garcia vs. Reyes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

45. Garcia vs.

You might also like