Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 35 views

    Gomez vs. CA, 168 SCRA 503 (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Lovely Grace Hechanova
    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) Prior to the issuance of a registration decree by the Land Registration Commission (now NLTDRA), the trial court still has power and control over its decision. This is because the finality of an adjudication takes place only after 1 year from the registration decree. 2) The case of Government vs. Abran is not the "law of the case" because the lots covered by existing homestead patents were not included in the private lands adjudicated in that case. Moreover, those homestead patents were registered before the decision in Government vs. Abran. 3) A registered homestead patent becomes indefeasible as a Torrens title and may no

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Gomez vs. CA, 168 SCRA 503 (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Lovely Grace Hechanova
    35 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) Prior to the issuance of a registration decree by the Land Registration Commission (now NLTDRA), the trial court still has power and control over its decision. This is because the finality of an adjudication takes place only after 1 year from the registration decree. 2) The case of Government vs. Abran is not the "law of the case" because the lots covered by existing homestead patents were not included in the private lands adjudicated in that case. Moreover, those homestead patents were registered before the decision in Government vs. Abran. 3) A registered homestead patent becomes indefeasible as a Torrens title and may no

    Original Description:

    LTD

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) Prior to the issuance of a registration decree by the Land Registration Commission (now NLTDRA), the trial court still has power and control over its decision. This is because the finality of an adjudication takes place only after 1 year from the registration decree. 2) The case of Government vs. Abran is not the "law of the case" because the lots covered by existing homestead patents were not included in the private lands adjudicated in that case. Moreover, those homestead patents were registered before the decision in Government vs. Abran. 3) A registered homestead patent becomes indefeasible as a Torrens title and may no

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    35 views1 page

    Gomez vs. CA, 168 SCRA 503 (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Lovely Grace Hechanova
    The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) Prior to the issuance of a registration decree by the Land Registration Commission (now NLTDRA), the trial court still has power and control over its decision. This is because the finality of an adjudication takes place only after 1 year from the registration decree. 2) The case of Government vs. Abran is not the "law of the case" because the lots covered by existing homestead patents were not included in the private lands adjudicated in that case. Moreover, those homestead patents were registered before the decision in Government vs. Abran. 3) A registered homestead patent becomes indefeasible as a Torrens title and may no

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    #4 Gomez vs.

    CA, 168 SCRA 503 (1988)


    Case Title, GR ATTY. JOSE S. GOMEZ, DELFINA GOMEZ ESTRADA, ENRIQUITA GOMEZ OXCIANO, BENITA GOMEZ
    Number, Date GARLITOS, REYNALDO GOMEZ ESPEJO, ARMANDO GOMEZ, ERLINDA GOMEZ GUICO, EUGENIA GOMEZ
    CALICDAN, AZUCENA GOMEZ ORENCIA, TEODORO S. GOMEZ, JR., and ALEJO S. GOMEZ (now deceased)
    represented by his wife, LETICIA Y. GOMEZ, and children, namely, MARGIE GOMEZ GOB, JACINTO Y.
    GOMEZ, ALEJO Y. GOMEZ, JR., and MARY ANN Y. GOMEZ, petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON.
    PEDRO G. ADUCAYEN, Judge Regional Trial Court, San Carlos City (Pangasinan) Branch LVI, HON. CHIEF,
    LAND REGISTRATION COMMISSION, Quezon City, Metro Manila, and SILVERIO G. PEREZ, Chief, Division of
    Original Registration, Land Registration Commission, Quezon City, Metro Manila, respondents.

    GR No. L-77770. December 15, 1988.


    Ponente PADILLA, J.
    Topic Special Patent
    Facts  In the case of Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Abran, the court declared Consolacion Gomez
    (Petitioner; the owner of certain lots. Petitioners became the absolute owners of the lots. Petitioners filed an
    Respondent) application for registration of said lots, which the RTC granted. RTC issued an order expressly stating
    that the decision become final and directed the LRC to issue the registration decrees.
     However, the RTC later amended its decision after the report of the LRC (now NLTDRA) had shown
    that homestead patents had already been issued on some of the lots, and that as a rule, land already
    granted by homestead patent can no longer be the subject of another registration.
     Petitioners argue that:
    o The LRC’s report should have been submitted to the RTC before its decision became final
    o The LRC’s report is inconsequential considering that no opposition was raised by the Bureau of
    Lands during the registration proceedings
    o After judgment has become final and executory, the court shall issue an order to the LRC for the
    issuance of the registration decree and certificate of title. LRC’s duty to do so is purely ministerial.
    o The law of the case is Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Abran, where it was decided that
    the lands of Consolacion, from whom petitioners derive their ownership over the lots were not
    public lands, and therefore they could not have been acquired by holders of homestead titles
    Issue and
    1. Whether prior to the LRC’s (now NLTDRA) issuance of the registration decree, the judge still has the
    Ruling power and control over the decision he rendered? – YES
    (Doctrine) o The finality or incontrovertibility of an adjudication of land in a registration or cadastral case takes
    place only after the expiration of the 1-year period after entry of the final registration decree.
    o As long as a final registration decree has not been entered by the LRC (now NLTDRA) and the period of
    1 year has not elapsed from date of entry of such decree, the title is not finally adjudicated and the
    decision in the registration proceeding continues to be under the control and sound discretion of the
    court rendering it.
    o Thus, the duty of land registration officials to render reports is not limited to the period before the
    court’s decision becomes final, but may extend even after its finality but not beyond the lapse of 1
    year from the entry of the decree.
    o The duty of land registration officials to issue the decree is ministerial in the sense that they act under
    the orders of the court and the decree must be in conformity with the decision of the court. However,
    if they are in doubt upon any point in relation to the preparation and issuance of the decree, it is their
    duty to refer the matter to the court. They act, as officials of the court and not as administrative
    officials, and their act is the act of the court. They are specifically called upon to “extend assistance to
    courts in ordinary and cadastral land registration proceedings.”

    2. Whether the case of Government vs. Abran is “the law of the case”? – NO
    o The lots covered by homestead patents were not included among the private lands adjudicated to
    Consolacion.
    o The report of land registration officials states that the holders of the homestead patents registered
    the lots in 1928 and 1929. The decision in Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Abran was
    promulgated in 1931. Hence, the subject lots are specifically excluded from those adjudicated to
    Consolacion.
    o A homestead patent, once registered under the Land Registration Act, becomes indefeasible and
    incontrovertible as a Torrens title, and may no longer be the subject of an investigation for
    determination or judgment in cadastral proceeding.
    Dispositive  SC denied the petition.

    You might also like