Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
Prescription, unavailing not only against the registered owner but also against
Assignment 1
Republic v CA
The 30-day period to appeal from decision of Land Registration Court should
be counted from receipt by the Office of the Solicitor General of the decision,
not from receipt thereof by the special counsel or fiscal acting for the O.S.G
o exceptional cases, like the instant case, the interest of justice may
warrant waiver of the rules
Where government claims that land registered is forestal, it should not be
estopped by the mistakes or errors of its agents
Certification of land as forest land by Forestry Director, as evidence of its
character
The area stated in the muniments of title, not the area comprised in the
boundaries, should prevail
It is a quitclaim. It is stated therein that in consideration of P200 the
Tesalona sisters releases and forever quitclaim unto the said Vendee the 29-
hectare land described in the composition title (Exh. F). (not a sale)
Applicant for land registration has duty to prove that his Spanish title justified
registration for the considerable increase in area
Tax declarations of applicant show a smaller area than that applied for.\
Forest land is not registerable whether the title is a Spanish title or a Torrens
title
Spanish titles are not indefeasible
P.D. 892, effective Feb. 16, 1976, bans use of Spanish titles as evidence in land
registration cases.
Ching v Malaya
Mere assertion of ownership by the defendant in an ejectment case will not
oust the municipal court of its summary jurisdiction
certificate of title presumed valid in the absence of evidence to the contrary;
Registration of the property is binding against the whole world, unless
annulled for cause in proper cases
Umbay v Alecha
No title to registered land in derogation to that of the registered owner shall
be acquired by prescription or adverse possession;
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
his hereditary successors
Torrens system is to quiet title to land and to stop forever any question as to
its legality.
o Once a title is registered, the owner may rest secure, without the
necessity of waiting in the portals of the court, or sitting in the
mirador de su casa, to avoid the possibility of losing his land
Registered lands not subject to prescription
o Adverse, notorious and continuous possession under a claim of
ownership for the period fixed by law ineffective against a Torrens
title
Action to recover possession of land cannot be barred by laches or delay where
the parties became aware of the encroachment on their land after they hired a
surveyor
Laches presupposes waiver of ones right
PNB v International Corporate bank
rule no longer holds that a regional trial court sitting as a land registration
court has limited jurisdiction and has no authority to resolve controversial
issues
Regional Trial Court acting as land registration court now have exclusive
jurisdiction not only over applications for original registration of title to lands
but also over petitions filed after original registration of title with power to
hear and determine all questions arising upon such applications or petitions.
PNB v CA
right to rely on what appears in the certificate of title where on its face the
properties are owned by the mortgagor, and there is no reason to doubt the
status of the registered owner and her ownership thereof.
General Rule that a person dealing with a registered land has a right to rely
upon the face of the Torrens certificates of title and to dispense with the need
of inquiring further
Exception: the party concerned has actual knowledge of facts and
circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious man to make such
inquiry.
A Torrens title concludes all controversies over ownership of the land covered
by a final decree of registration
When the property is registered in the name of a spouse only and there is no
showing as to when the property was acquired by said spouse, the property
belongs exclusively to said spouse;
1
Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
Presumption under Art 160 of the Civil Code cannot prevail when the title is in
the name of only one spouse and the rights of innocent third parties are
involved.
mortgagee in good faith as it was not aware that at the time the mortgages
were constituted there was a flaw of the mortgagor's title.
Bornales v IAC
Petitioners knew and were parties to the fraud committed against respondent
spouse; Petitioners cannot invoke the indefeasibility of a certificate of title as
they bought the registered land from their vendors who procured title to the
land by means of fraud.
Viajar v CA
registration under the Torrens System does not protect the riparian owner
against the diminution of the area of his registered land through gradual
changes in the course of an adjoining stream
Coronel v IAC
Simple possession of a certificate of title under the Torrens system does not
make the possessor a true owner of all the property described therein
Galloy v CA
Mere possession of a certificate of title under the Torrens system is not
conclusive as to the holders true ownership of all the property described
therein
Republic v CA
Land already registered as patrimonial property of the State can no longer be
registered in the name of another person
Prescription not applicable to actions to recover possession of registered land
Tongson v Director of Forestry
Mangrove lands are not included in the term timber or mineral lands as used in
the Revised Administrative Code
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
Ampoloquio v CA
did not and could not have acquired ownership over the said land considering
that the same was then inalienable and non-disposable
Republic v Ayala y Cia
Non-registrable properties revert to public dominion
o Ex. Private registered land was found to be foreshore land, court can
order reversion
purchasers in good faith of non-registrable property have a right to retention
of the property until they are reimbursed of the necessary expenses made
thereon
cannot be made liable for damages allegedly suffered by other parties on
account of their possession of the property
Republic v Vda De Castillo
Shores are properties of the public domain intended for public use, and not
registrable
Resjudicata does not apply since the lots in litigation are of public domain
accretions on the bank of a lake, like Laguna de Bay, belong to the owners of
the estate to which they have been added
while accretion on a sea bank still belongs to the public domain, and is not
available for private ownership until formally declared by the government to
be no longer needed for public use
Mere Possession of land does not by itself divest automatically the land of its
public character
Director of Forest v Munoz
Although evidence of ownership, these Spanish titles may be lost thru
prescription (neither indefeasible nor imprescriptible.)
Possession of forest Iands cannot ripen into private ownership
Assignment 2
Republic v Doldol
simple thirty-year prescriptive period of occupation by an applicant for judicial
confirmation of imperfect title.
2
Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
Amended; by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been
in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of
agricultural lands of the public domain, under a bona fide claim of acquisition
or ownership, since June 12, 1945 or earlier,
The Public Land Act requires that the applicant must prove (a) that the land is
alienable public land and (b) that his open, continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession and occupation of the same must either be since time immemorial
or for the period prescribed in the Public Land Act
The law, as presently phrased, requires that possession of lands of the public
domain must be from June 12, 1945 or earlier, for the same to be acquired
through judicial confirmation of imperfect title
Heirs of Malaban v Republic
Property Registration Decree and the inclusion of Section 14(1) therein, the
Public Land Act has remained in effect. Both laws commonly refer to persons
or their predecessors-in-interest who have been in open, continuous,
exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable
lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12,
1945, or earlier.
Under the Civil Code that where lands of the public domain are patrimonial in
character, they are susceptible to acquisitive prescription
Alienable and disposable lands are expressly declared by the State to be no
longer intended for public service or for the development of the national
wealth that the period of acquisitive prescription can begin to run. Such
declaration shall be in the form of a law duly enacted by Congress or a
Presidential Proclamation in cases where the President is duly authorized by
law
If a public land is declared patrimonial by law or proclamation, can the period
of possession prior to such conversion be reckoned in counting the period of
prescription? No
Lands belonging to the public domain may not be acquired by prescription
(concurring opinion)
Pons realty Corp v CA
The complaint in dispute can be filed only by the judicial administrator of the
estate of the late Don Mariano San Pedro as it was alleged therein that the
land subject thereof forms part of said estate
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
Francisco v CA
Land Registration Act commands that the applicant shall also state the name
in full and the address of the applicant, and also the names and addresses of all
occupants of the land and of all adjoining owners, if known; and, if not known,
it shall state what search has been made to find them
Nicolas v Director of lands
there was sufficient allegation of actual fraud in the complaint, such as the
failure and intentional omission on the part of the respondents, applicants for
registration of the lands in question, to disclose the fact of actual physical
possession of the premises by petitioner herein
The written appearance with opposition presented by petitioner in the case at
bar against the applicants for registration of land, was a valid one and
sufficient to give him a legal standing in court and would entitle him to notice,
as a matter of right.
Vda de Cailles v Mayuga
Petitioners failure to oppose the application for registration can be construed
as an abandonment or non-existence of grounds to contest it because they are
deemed to have had constructive notice of the registration case, a proceeding
in rem arising from the publication of the notice in the Official Gazette in 1937
Larangan v CA
an applicant for registration is not necessarily entitled to have the land
registered in his name simply because no one appears to oppose his title and
to oppose the registration of the land. He must show, even in the absence of
opposition, to the satisfaction of the court, that he is the absolute owner, in
fee simple
Courts may, even in the absence of any opposition, deny registration of the
land under the Torrens system, if the facts presented do not show that the
petitioner is the owner, in fee simple, of the land which he seeks to register.
Yabut Lee v Punzalan
Petition for review under Sec. 38 of Act 496 presupposes issuance of decree of
registration and rendition of court decision; Premature filing of petition for
reopening and/or review where no decision or decree has been issued.
oppositor is allowed to present his evidence to prove ownership of disputed
land despite declaration of general default against him and provided that no
3
Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
decision has been rendered or that a decree of registration has been issued in
the case
Gutierrez Hermanos v CA
The burden of proof in land registration cases is upon the applicant.
Registrable rights must be grounded on well-nigh incontrovertible evidence
and based on positive and absolute proof
Under Act 496, an applicant for registration of land is required to present
muniments of title
o prima facie evidence of possession
o presented: titulo real or royal grant, a concession especial or special
grant, a composicion con el estado or adjustment title, or a titulo de
compra or title through purchase; titulo posesorio or possessory
information title
Requisites for registration
o a) Those who prior to the transfer of sovereignty from Spain to the
United States have applied for the purchase, composition or other
form of grant of lands of the public domain under the laws and royal
decrees then in force and have instituted and prosecuted the
proceeding in connection therewith, but have with or without default
upon their part, or for any other cause, not received title therefor, if
such applicants or grantees and their heirs have occupied and
cultivated said lands continuously since the filing of their applications.
o (b) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors in interest
have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession
and occupation of agricultural lands of the public domain, under a
bona fide claim of acquisition or ownership, for at least thirty years
immediately preceding the filing of the application for confirmation of
title except when prevented by war or force majeure
o These shall be conclusively presumed to have performed all the
conditions essential to a Government grant and shall be entitled to a
certificate of title under the provisions of this chapter.
Republic v CA
While the best evidence to identify a piece of land for registration purposes is
the original tracing cloth plan from the Bureau of Lands, blue print copies and
other evidence could also provide sufficient identification
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
Fernandez v Maravilla
The mere mention by the law that the relief afforded by Section 38 of Act 496
may be sought in the competent Court of First Instance is no sufficient
indication that the petition must be filed in the Court of First Instance,
exercising its general jurisdiction, considering the fact that it is also the Court
of First Instance that acts on land registration cases. Upon the other hand, it
has been held that the adjudication of land in a registration or cadastral case
does not become f inal and incontrovertible until the expiration of one year
from entry of the final decree, and that as long as the final decree is not issued
and the period of one year within which it may be reviewed has not elapsed,
the decision remains under the control and sound discretion of the court
rendering the decree, which court after hearing, may even set aside said
decision or decree and adjudicate the land to another.
Assignment 3
Fule v De Lagare
A purchaser in good faith is one who buys property of another, without notice
that some other person has a right to, or interest in, such property and pays a
full and fair price for the same, at the time of such purchase, or before he has
notice of the claim or interest of some other persons in the property. Good
faith consists in an honest intention to abstain from taking any unconscientious
advantage of another
Production of owners duplicate certificate deemed conclusive authority to
enter new certificate
where the certificate of title was already transferred from the name of the true
owner to the forger, and while it remained that way, the land was
subsequently sold to an innocent purchaser, such forged deed may convey
title. For then, the vendee had the right to rely upon what appeared in the
certificate.
Where there was nothing in the certificate of title to indicate any cloud or vice
in the ownership of the property, or any encumbrance thereon, the purchaser
is not required to explore farther than what the Torrens title upon its face
indicates in quest for any hidden defect or inchoate right that may
subsequently defeat his right thereto
Balbin v Register of Deeds of Ilocos sur
Where three co-owner's duplicate certificates of title are issued under Sec. tion
43 of Act 496, a voluntary instrument cannot be registered without
4
Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
surrendering all the copies of the same title to the Register of Deeds so that
every copy thereof would contain identical entries of the transactions affecting
the land covered by the title.
Deed of donation of conjugal property executed by husband cannot be
registered because it bears on its face an infirmity, namely, the fact that the
two-thirds portion of said property which he donated is more than his one-half
share
matter of registration of an instrument disposing of a registered land under the
Torrens system may be suspended to await the outcome of a suit to determine
the validity of the different conveyances executed by the person seeking the
registration of the voluntary instrument
DBP v Mangawang
Where two certificates of title over the same parcel of land were regularly
issued to the same person, said person sold the two certificate to different
person who were in good faith, the sale first made and registered is the valid
one, considering that when the subsequent sale was made by the former
owner he had nothing more to sell
sells the same land to two different persons who are unaware of the flaw that
lies in its title, the law adjudicates the property to the purchaser who first
registers the transaction in his name in the registry of property
Gatioan v Gaffud
Registration; All persons are deemed with knowledge thereof
When a conveyance has been properly recorded such record is constructive
notice of its contents and all interests legal and equitable, included therein
it is presumed that the purchaser has examined every instrument of record
affecting the title. Such presumption is irrebutable. He is charged with notice
of every fact shown by the record and is presumed to know every fact which
an examination of the record would have disclosed. This presumption cannot
be overcome by proof of innocence or good faith.
two certificates of title are issued to different persons covering the same land
in whole or in part, the earlier in date must prevail as between original parties
and in case of successive registrations where more than one certificate is
issued
purchaser from the owner of the later certificate and his successors, should
resort to his vendor for redress
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
Bergado v CA
defense of inapplicability of prescription/laches because land has registered
title cannot hold since what was registered was not their ownership of the
property
Mere registration of title in case of double sale not enough, good faith must
concur with the registration
The inscription of the Escritura de Compraventa in 1964 produced no legal
effect because it was made in bad faith. Ownership should therefore vest in
the respondent Republic of the Philippines because it was first in possession of
the property in good faith
Heirs of Clauro Laureta v IAC
Validity of a title depends on the knowledge, actual or constructive, of the
prior sale.
Partial execution is legally premature pending resolution of its validity
Roxas v Dinglasan
In case of sale of a piece of land titled under the Torrens System, it is the act of
registration, and not tradition, that transfers the ownership of the land sold
Innocent purchaser for value; Doctrine applies to an innocent mortgagee for
value.
Where the vendor fails to deliver to the vendee the duplicate certificate of
title, the vendee should have filed immediately with the office of the Register
of Deeds an adverse claim under Section 110 of Act No. 496, as amended
PNB v IAC
A person dealing with property covered by a Torrens Certificate of Title is not
required to go beyond what appears in the title
When there is nothing on the face of the title to indicate any cloud or vice in
the ownership of the property or any encumbrances thereon, the purchaser is
not required to explore further than what the Torrens Title upon its face
indicates in quest for any hidden defect or inchoate right that may
subsequently defeat his right thereto
bank is not required before accepting a mortgage to make a detailed
investigation of the history of the title of the property being given as security
5
Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
Natalia Realty Corp v Vallez
Certificates of Title issued in the name of the plaintiff in accordance with the
Land Registration Act (Act No. 496) is indefeasible after the expiration of one
year from the entry of the decree of registration
Under Section 38 thereof, a petition for review of the decree must be
presented within one year after its entry as described and defined in Section
40 of the same. After the lapse of one year, the decree of registration becomes
incontrovertible, and is binding upon and conclusive against all persons
whether or not they were notified of or participated in the registration
proceedings
A certificate of title cannot be subject to collateral attack and can be altered,
modified or cancelled only in a direct proceeding in accordance with law.
Act No. 496 provides that no title to registered land in derogation of that of the
registered owner shall be acquired by adverse possession.
JM Tuason and Co. Inc v CA
Mere possession cannot defeat imprescriptible title to holder of registered
Torrens title to real property; Registered real property cannot be acquired by
acquisitive prescription
cannot be considered exactly as possessors in good faith because both of them
knew at the time they entered into possession that petitioner was the
registered owner of the disputed land
he knows that there were suspensive conditions attached to his possible
acquisition of the disputed property and that if the conditions were not
fulfilled his right as beneficiary would never arise
Registered owner of land entitled to possession and to initiate action to
recover possession of land.
Medina v Chanco
The court below should have granted the motion to dismiss at bar as herein
petitioners are clearly purchasers in good faith and the complaint below does
not allege that petitioners participated in the alleged fraudulent transfer made
to their predecessor-in-interest
although an original owner of a registered land may seek the annulment of a
transfer thereof on the ground of fraud, such a remedy, however, is "without
prejudice to the rights of any innocent holder for value" of the certificate of
title
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
Duran v IAC
Fraudulent and forged document of sale may become the root of a valid title if
the certificate of title had already been transferred from the name of the true
owner to the name indicated in the forger
Reliance on certificate of title sufficient, even if the sale was void, as the
functionings of the Torrens system of registration is involved
Where innocent third persons like mortgagees relying on the certificate of title
acquire rights over the property, their rights cannot be disregarded.
Estoppel by laches; Failure of petitioners in not promptly bringing a suit to
question the deed of sale of the properties because the signature of the
vendee was allegedly a forgery, fatal to their cause.
Republic v CA
An innocent purchaser for value is one who buys the property of another,
without notice that some other person has a right to, or interest in, such
property and pays a full and fair price for the same, at the time of such
purchase, or before he has notice of the claim or interest of some other person
in the property.
A defective title may be the source of a completely legal and valid title in the
hands of an innocent purchaser for value
Every person dealing with registered land may safely rely on the correctness of
the certificate of title issued therefor and the law will in no way oblige him to
go behind the certificate to determine the condition of the property
Assignment 4
Dirige v Biranya
A question of lawnot affecting the jurisdiction over the subject matternot
raised in the lower court may not be considered for the first time on appeal
Without formal appearance, counsel is not entitled to notice. It is not enough
that he appears at the trial
question whether or not notice was actually sent to the defendants lawyer is one
of fact - Factual issue should be ventilated in trial court
In case of appeal to the Court of First Instance, clerk of court should notify the
parties of the docketing of the appeal
The recording of the judgment or order in the book of entries of judgments
shall constitute its entry
The alternative phrase or such proceeding was taken employed in Section 3
of Rule 38 could be taken to mean other proceedings which are not to be
6
Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
entered, such as a writ of execution (Aquino vs. Blanco, 79 Phil. 647, 650) and
an order approving a compromise agreement (Bodiongan vs. Ceniza, 102 Phil.
750). In such cases, the period must have to commence from the date of
occurrence because entry is either unnecessary or inconsequential.
Rublico v Orellana
The essential requisites or elements for the allowance of the reopening or
review of a decree are: (a) that the petitioner has a real or dominical right; (b)
that he has been deprived thereof; (c) through fraud; (d) that the petition is
filed within one year from the issuance of the decree; and (e) that the property
has not as yet been transferred to an innocent purchaser
A petitioner for review under Section 38 of Act 496, as amended, need not be
an original claimant in a cadastral proceeding and need not secure the lifting of
-the order of general default with respect to himself
Petition for review must allege facts. sufficient to constitute cause of action
o "by means of fraud made this Honorable Court believe that he is the
owner of said lots (conclusion of law only)
Frias v Esquivel
justify the setting aside or review of a decree of registration under Section 38
of Act No. 496, the party seeking relief must allege and prove, inter alia, that
the registration was procured through fraudactual and extrinsic
If the fraud alleged in the petition to set aside the decree is involved in the
same proceedings in which the party seeking relief had ample opportunity to
assert his right, to attack the document presented by the applicant for
registration, and to cross-examine the witnesses who testified relative thereto,
then the fraud relied upon is intrinsic.
The fraud is extrinsic if it was employed to deprive a party of his day in court,
thus preventing him from asserting his right to the property registered in the
name of the applicant
Republic v De Kalintas
While a decree entered by the Land Registration Commission is a consequence
of a judgment rendered by the land registration court, it has a virtuality all its
own. It is the basis for the issuance of the certificate of title by the Register of
Deeds, a result that the judgment can not produce
A decree of registration may be reviewed not only by reason of fraud but also
for a fatal infirmity of the decision upon which the decree is based, provided
no innocent purchaser for value will be prejudiced
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
o Ex: fraudulent connivance between judge and the respondents Lopez,
to the prejudice of appella
Land Registration Act (made applicable to Cadastral proceedings by section 11
of Act 2259) requires that all petitions and motions after original registration
"shall be filed and entitled in the original case in which the decree of
registration was entered," the purpose being to avoid confusion and difficulty
in tracing the origin of the entries in the registry
Rural bank of Sariaya v Yacon
subsequent declaration of a title as null and void is not a ground for nullifying
the mortgage right of a mortgagee in good faith
innocent mortgagee for value has the right to rely on what appears on the
certificate of title. In the absence of anything to excite or arouse suspicion, said
mortgagee is under no obligation to look beyond the certificate and investigate
the title of the mortgagor appearing on the face of said certificate
Failure to duly investigate who are the true owners of the land offered as
collateral, was considered as constitutive of negligence on the part of the bank.
Negligent/bad faith of bank
o haste on the part of Luis Parco in applying for a loan, a circumstance
which could not have escaped the attention of the banks personnel
Maquiling v Umadhay
Sale of registered land; Good faith protects only purchaser for value from the
registered owner
Esconde vBarlongay
In case a decree of registration is obtained by fraud, party defrauded has one
year from entry of the decree to file a petition for review, provided there has
been no transfer to an innocent purchaser for value
Failure to object to registration under Torrens System or to question its validity
within one year after issuance of certificate of title claimant lost his right to
such land
Action for reconveyancea legal remedy granted to rightful owner of land
wrongfully or erroneously registered in the name of another to compel the
latter to reconvey the land to him
Action for reconveyance of property on the ground of fraudfiled within four
years from discovery of fraud
Such an action does not aim or purport to re-open the registration proceeding
and set aside the decree of registration, but only to show that the person who
7
Land Titles 2A Midterms Short Case doctrines
secured the registration of the questioned property is not the real owner
thereof
Cabrera v CA
Annulment of a registration under Torrens System should be made with the
utmost caution and cannot be done collaterally
Action for reconveyance may be filed even before the issuance ofthe decree of
registration
There is no such jurisprudence that tax declarations are binding on the whole
world because of their nature as public instruments
Gicano v Gegato
An action to recover an immovable from a defendant allegedly holding it under
a constructive trust prescribes in 10 years from issuance of title to the
defendant
Sotto v Teves
In trusteeship, legal title to property appears in the name of a trustee, while
equitable title remains with the cestui que trust;
Registration of property cannot be relief upon where express trust exists;
Will and last testament of deceased conveying properties to another should
not prejudice cestui que trust and recipient deemed to have received the
properties for the benefit of the cestui que trust
Certificate of title cannot be used to defeat right and cause of action of the
cestui que trust;
Registration of lots in favor of another and their subsequent fraudulent
transfers not considered acts of repudiation of express trust
Manarpaac v Cabantan
Possession since time immemorial carries the presumption that the land had
never been part of the public domain, or that it had been a private property
even before the Spanish conquest
The remedy of the landowner whose property has been wrongfully or
erroneously registered in anothers name is,
o after one year from the date of the decree, not to set aside the decree
but, respecting the decree as incontrovertible and no longer open to
review, to bring an ordinary action in the ordinary court of justice for
reconveyance or,
Based on the syllabus compilation made by Allen Gerona
Padilla || CROMBONDS 2012-2013
o if the property has passed into the hands of an innocent puchaser for
value, for damages
Vda. De Carreon v Cartagena
The words ownership and fraud are not magic incantations the absence of
which renders a pleading worthless. Ownership and fraud are better expressed
in entire sentences and paragraphs illustrating these concepts.
(ownership/fraud must be allege to award reconveyance)
The defendants assert rights of ownership. The plaintiffs do not fall under the
class of innocent title holders contemplated in the provisions on compensation
from the assurance fund. As the lower court observed, the plaintiffs are not
innocent purchasers for value who acquired the land for valuable
consideration. They merely stepped into the shoes of Feliciano Carreon.
Treasurer of the Philippines vs CA
Sale of land by an impostor to respondents conveyed no title or any interest at
all to them as the supposed vendor had no title or interest to transfer and he
was not the owner of the land
Cancellation of the title of respondents did not deprive them of the land when
their certificate of title was declared a total nullity, as they were not for a
single moment the owner of the property
Failure of respondents to exert necessary diligence in verifying the credentials
of the impostor-seller before they purchased the property, fatal to their cause
Respondents cannot claim the status of innocent purchasers of the land for
such failure to exercise the necessary diligence, and they never acquired any
title to the land or any interest therein
Respondents being neither the registered owners nor innocent purchasers,
they are not entitled to recover from the Assurance Fund
Remedy of respondents is to proceed against the impostor in a civil action for
recovery and damages or prosecute him under the Revised Penal Code.
8