Você está na página 1de 3

TOLEDO VS BANAGA This case is actually an appeal of the decision of CA ,which declared malerio as owner of the land, Register

of deeds frustrated respondent malerio, refuse to issue certificate of title on the ground that that the matter should be referred in consulta. This is originally an action of redemption by petitioner toledo banaga, trial court declared she lost her right to redeem when it was forclosed and sold at public auction to private respondent malerio, certificate of title issued to malerio, overwhich petition banaga annotated a notice of lis dispendens, CA allowed banaga to redeem property within a certain period, private respondent petition In this court was dismissed and the decision was final Banaga tried to redeem, which deposited to the court the amount of redemption which was financed by co-petitioner jovita Tan, Private respondent object the redemption, because it is giving banaga beyond the time given by the earlier case. register of deed cancellation of private res title, and new one in favor of banaga, then private respondents cause an annotation jan 1993 , four days after banaga sold to tan mentioning not yet cancelled, so the title was still with the malerio, which carry the title, so sold to tan, then subdivided to several lots, title still in the name of malerio, so TAN took the risk. Declared private respondent owner of the title. THE TITLE WITH MALERIO, BUT THE LAND IN CUSTODY OF TAN. DECLARE THE TITLE ISSUED TO BANAGA AND TAN AS MERE TRANSFERIES AS NULL AND VOID, AND ISSUE NEW TO MALERIO THE COURT: THEY CONFUSING REFER BANAGA AND TAN AS RESPOND, BANAGA AND TAN? GOOD FAITH RES JUDICATA ARE PRESENT THE SUPREME COURT ENUMERATED RES JUDICATA *** CERTIFICATE OF TITLE STILL WITH MALERIO..


EMPHASIS: TAKE NOTE ABOUT SEC 79 , WHETHER IN ACTION TO RECOVER REAL ESTATE, XXXX THE LATTER SHALL ENTITLED NEW CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, AND CANCELLATION OF OLD TITLE, THAT IS WHY REG OF DEED of general santos DENIED ISSUED DECREE, this has something to do with sec 79 in relation to section 107 IN AN INVOLUNTARY DEALING THERE IS ALWAYS that requirement to surrender owners duplicate of title, remember in padilla it was a levy on execution, in other words the property in this case was made to answer for a judgment debt or a judgment obligation, so the property was NOT THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE OBLIGATION BUT JUST MADE TO ANSWER A JUDGMENT DEBT, BEC IN LEVY FOR EXECTUION, the defendant WHO IS THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR is the losing party, SO IN ORDER TO ENFORCE THE JUDGMENT, the plaintiff would look a property in his name , sheriff IDENTIFY A PROPERTY OF REGISTERED LAND, will levy this property, levy of execution , certificate of sale until A PETITION OF issuance of NEW title UNDER 75, unlike in TOLEDO banaga the title OR PROPERTY IS SUBJECT MATTER OF LITIGATION, AND A DECISION MADE IN FAVOR OF THE WINNING PARTY MALERIO ,so the register of deeds denied registration, first there has to be a surrender of owners , and you cannot file a case to compel me bec there is still a remedy to go to consulta , but supreme court said no, this contention has no place in our legal system, bec the losing party can prevent the execution by refusing to surrender owners duplicate of certificate of title.. to litigate again by (sec 107) petition, mentioned here if allowed, then all elements of res judicata is present. So the ruling here against Banaga. In this case one of the exception where not necessary for the surrender of owners dup of title, ***SUMMARY*****what are the instances not necessary to surrender the owners duplicate of certificate of title IN THIS CASE: 1. DECISION THAT IS FINAL AND FOR EXECUTION 2. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE IS THE REGISTERED PROPERTY OR TITLE ITSELF 3. ONE OF THE PARTIES TO THE CASE IS THE REGISTERED OWNER, WHEN ALL OF THESE ARE PRESENT NO LONGER REQUIRED TO SURRENDER OWNERS DUPLICATE OF TITLE THIS CASE I WANT YOU TO REMEMBER BEC PRACTIONERS EVEN JUDGES NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS CASE, ONE PROFESSOR HAD SIMILAR CASE BUT COURT REFUSE BEC ABSENCE OF OWNERS DUPLICATE OF CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, SO MY FRIEND CITED THIS CASE, AND THE COURT AGREED granted the issuance of certificate of title, this is one of the more important cases the application .