|
Letter received: I was a contented Filipino worker in
California, but I was virtually forced to leave my employment to
avert the loss of my Torrens-titled piece of land. My relatives
wrote to inform me that a greedy neighbor had taken steps to have my
title canceled in order to take possession of my land. Driven by
anxiety, I rushed home to save my property. Fortunately, I came
across your column in The Manila Times, extending legal assistance
to people in distress, like me.
It was in October 1969, when I
filed with the Bureau of Lands (now Lands Management Bureau) a
Miscellaneous Sales Application covering a 300 square-meter
government lot. The District Land Officer supported my application
with a favorable report and recommendation, so my application was
approved. Subsequently, in 1971, a Miscellaneous Sales Patent was
issued in my favor. Later, in 1988, an Original Certificate of Title
was issued. The following year, one Eva Dedo filed a protest with
the Bureau of Lands claiming that I obtained the sales patent
through fraud, false statement of facts and/or omission of material
facts. She claimed, falsely, that one hundred fifty square meters
awarded to me covered the land where her house is situated.
I learned that in 1993, the
Director of Lands (on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines)
upon instruction from someone at the Office of the President,
instituted a petition with the Regional Trial Court for the
amendment of the original certificate of title in my name. I filed a
motion to dismiss that petition and I stated that my title is
irrevocable and can no longer be questioned. Unfortunately, the RTC
denied my motion. There was no fraud and misrepresentation when I
acquired the Sales Patent and the Original Certificate of Title. Am
I right in my posture? Should I go on fighting in court for my
property?
Bernard
Reply to Bernard
Your property, which was once
part of the lands of the public domain and disposed of via a
miscellaneous sales agreement, is now covered by an original
certificate of title. Grants of public land were brought under the
operation of the Torrens System by Act 496, or the Land Registration
Act of 1903. Section 122 of Act 496 provides:
Whenever public lands belonging
to the Government of the Republic of the Philippines are alienated,
granted, or conveyed to persons or to public or private
corporations, the same shall be brought under the operation of this
Act and shall become registered lands. It shall be the duty of the
official issuing the instrument of alienation, grant or conveyance
in behalf of the Government to cause such instrument before its
delivery to the grantee, to be filed with the register of deeds for
the province where the land lies and to be registered therein, like
other deeds and conveyances, whereupon a certificate shall be
entered as in other cases of registered land, and an owner’s
duplicate certificate issued to the grantee.
Such Torrens certificate is
evidence of an indefeasible title to property in favor of the person
whose name appears thereon. However, Section 38 of said law provides
that such decree shall be reopened—if the decree of registration
was obtained by actual fraud—by filing in the proper Court of
First Instance (now Regional Trial Court) a petition for review of
the decree of registration within one year after entry of the
decree, provided no innocent purchaser for value has acquired an
interest. Upon the expiration of the one-year period, every decree
or certificate of title issued in accordance with this section shall
be incontrovertible.
Clearly, a petition for reopening
and review of the decree of registration must be filed within one
year from the date of entry of said decree. In the case of public
land grants or patents, the one-year period commences from the
issuance of the patent by the government. Parenthetically, it should
be stated that a piece of land covered by a registered patent and
the corresponding certificate of title ceases to be part of the
public domain. As such, it is considered a private property over
which the Director of Lands has neither control nor jurisdiction.
Your certificate of title, having
been registered under the Torrens system, is vested with the garment
of indefeasibility. Such is the ruling of the Supreme Court in
Republic of the Philippines v. Benjamin Guerrero (G.R. No. 133168,
prom. March 28, 2006). You own the whole 300 square meters. God
bless you, Bernard.
Above all things: let us reflect
on the following words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: “I am the living
bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live
forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of
the world.” (John 6:51)
|
