Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 48 views

    Ledesma V Municipality of Iloilo

    Uploaded by

    Jan Camele Lawsin
    Concepcion Lopez originally owned several lots, including lots 537 and 703. She sold lots 537 and 703 to the City of Iloilo. However, through multiple errors, lots 537 and 703 were incorrectly included in the certificates of title transferring ownership of the other lots. Celso Ledesma believed he had become the owner of lots 537 and 703 based on their inclusion in the certificates of title. However, the court ruled that the inclusion of the lots was a mistake and did not override the original sale of the lots to the City of Iloilo for street purposes. Possession of a certificate of title including a lot by mistake does not make one the

    Copyright:

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

    Ledesma V Municipality of Iloilo

    Uploaded by

    Jan Camele Lawsin
    48 views2 pages
    Concepcion Lopez originally owned several lots, including lots 537 and 703. She sold lots 537 and 703 to the City of Iloilo. However, through multiple errors, lots 537 and 703 were incorrectly included in the certificates of title transferring ownership of the other lots. Celso Ledesma believed he had become the owner of lots 537 and 703 based on their inclusion in the certificates of title. However, the court ruled that the inclusion of the lots was a mistake and did not override the original sale of the lots to the City of Iloilo for street purposes. Possession of a certificate of title including a lot by mistake does not make one the

    Original Title

    01. Ledesma v Municipality of Iloilo

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Concepcion Lopez originally owned several lots, including lots 537 and 703. She sold lots 537 and 703 to the City of Iloilo. However, through multiple errors, lots 537 and 703 were incorrectly included in the certificates of title transferring ownership of the other lots. Celso Ledesma believed he had become the owner of lots 537 and 703 based on their inclusion in the certificates of title. However, the court ruled that the inclusion of the lots was a mistake and did not override the original sale of the lots to the City of Iloilo for street purposes. Possession of a certificate of title including a lot by mistake does not make one the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    48 views2 pages

    Ledesma V Municipality of Iloilo

    Uploaded by

    Jan Camele Lawsin
    Concepcion Lopez originally owned several lots, including lots 537 and 703. She sold lots 537 and 703 to the City of Iloilo. However, through multiple errors, lots 537 and 703 were incorrectly included in the certificates of title transferring ownership of the other lots. Celso Ledesma believed he had become the owner of lots 537 and 703 based on their inclusion in the certificates of title. However, the court ruled that the inclusion of the lots was a mistake and did not override the original sale of the lots to the City of Iloilo for street purposes. Possession of a certificate of title including a lot by mistake does not make one the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Land Title and Deeds

    Torrens System

    CELSO LEDESMA, plaintiff-appellant


    Vs
    THE MUNICIPALITY OF ILOILO, CONCEPCION LOPEZ, MAXIMO M. KALAW, and wife, and JULIO
    LEDESMA, defendants-appellees

    G.R. No. 26337. December 17, 1926

    JOHNSON, J:

    Facts:

    Concepcion Lopez was the owner of lots 228-A, 228-B, 537, and 703. She sold to the City of Iloilo lot
    number 537 and 703.

    A certificate of title No. 464 was issued in favor of Concepcion for lot 228, including lots 537 and 703.
    The inclusion of lots 537 and 703 was an error of someone with the office of the registrar of titles under
    the Torrens system.

    Concepcion Lopez sold to Maximo M. Kalaw and wife said lot 228, including lots 537 and 703 evidently
    by mistake.

    Concepcion Lopez, representing Maximo M. Kalaw, sold said lots (228, 537, and 703) to Julio Ledesma. a
    transfer certificate of title No. 908 was issued in favor of Julio Ledesma and admitted that lots 537 and
    703 were included by mistake.

    Julio Ledesma sold a portion of lot No. 228-A, 537, and 703 to appellant Celso Ledesma. According to
    Julio Ledesma, lots 537 and 703 were included by mistake in the transfer of lot No. 228-A.

    Municipality of Iloilo contended that it had purchased said lots for the purpose of widening the adjoining
    streets.

    CFI concluded that a preponderance of the evidence supported the contention of the defendants, and
    rendered a judgment absolving them from all liability under the complaint.

    Appellant Celso Ledesma theory: by reason of the fact that lots 537 and 703 had been included in the
    registered title of Concepcion Lopez and included in each succeeding transfer of title to him said lots,
    that he was the indisputable owner thereof, and because the City of Iloilo had appropriated said lots,
    that he was entitled to recover the value of said lots together with damages.

    Issue:
    Whether the inclusion by mistake of lots 537 and 703 makes Celso Ledesma the owner.

    Ruling:

    No.

    An examination of the record shows that,said lots had been turned over by Concepcion Lopez to the City
    of Iloilo under a contract of sale for street purposes. That fact was well known. The said lots had been
    Land Title and Deeds
    Torrens System

    included as a part of the streets of the City of Iloilo. They had been segregated from the lot formerly
    owned by Concepcion Lopez. Said lots 537 and 703 had become a part of a public highway established
    by law.

    The simple possession of a certificate of title, under the Torrens system, does not necessarily make the
    possessor a true owner of all the property described therein. If a person obtains a title, under the
    Torrens system, which includes by mistake or oversight land which cannot be registered under the
    Torrens system, he does not, by virtue of said certificate alone, become the owner of the lands illegally
    included.

    The inclusion of public highways in a certificate of title does not thereby necessarily give to the holder
    of such certificate said public highways.

    The appellant, therefore, even though a part of said streets (lots 537 and 703) had been included in the
    original certificate of title and in the subsequent transfers of title, did not become the owner of said
    lots and is not therefore entitled to recover their value from the City of Iloilo nor the damages prayed
    for.

    The Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court.

    You might also like