Anda di halaman 1dari 4

Owner ( Lot-1135-A )( Lot-53-A )( Lot-1444-A )

The best evidence of ownership is the certificate of title duly issued by the Register of Deeds
concerned. However, in the absence of a title, tax
declaration coupled by actual possession and existence of improvement also substantiate claim for
ownership.
P.D.Section 47. Registered land not subject to prescriptions. No title to registered land in derogation of
the title of the registered owner shall be acquired by prescription or adverse possession.
Section 48. Certificate not subject to collateral attack. A certificate of title shall not be subject to
collateral attack. It cannot be altered, modified, or canceled except in a direct proceeding in
accordance with law.
The owners duplicate Certificate of Title is issued by the Register of Deeds in the name of the person
in whose ownership of the land was decreed and this is given to the registered owner. (Pres. Decree
No. 1529, Sec. 41)
Tax Dec to a non alienable and disposable landTaxed by non co-owner/owner( Lot-1135-A )( Lot-53-A )( Lot-1444-A )
Boracay ruling lesson: Tax declaration not sufficient proof of land ownership
There is a big lesson to be learned from the Supreme Court (SC) decision confirming that Boracay
Island is owned by the State: beware of buying properties where the seller can only show tax
declarations as these documents do not guarantee ownership of the land.According to Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Undersecretary Manuel Gerochi, many land buyers have
fallen victims to these dubious real estate transactions because of unfamiliarity with our land laws.
Tax declaration is not a proof of ownership. Its only a proof of possession, Gerochi said. Many land
buyers have been misled to believe that tax declarations assure the buyer ownership of the land.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 464
Sec. 8. Listing of Real Property in the Assessment Rolls. In every province and city, there shall be
prepared and maintained by the provincial or city assessor an assessment roll wherein shall be listed
all real property, whether taxable or exempt, located within the province or city. Real property shall be
listed and valued in the name of the owner or administrator, or anyone having legal interest in the
property.
The undivided real property of a deceased person may be listed and valued in the name of the estate,
or of the heirs and devisee without designating them individually; and undivided real property other
than owned by a deceased may be listed and valued in the name of one or more co-owners; Provided;
however, That such heir, devisee or co-owner shall be liable severally for all obligations imposed by
this Code and for the payment of the real property tax with respect to the undivided property.
P.D.1529 sec 14
Section 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file in the proper Court of First Instance an
application for registration of title to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized
representatives:

(1) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest 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.
Registration ( Lot- 1884 )Is a deed of sale or a mortgage document sufficient to convey ownership of
land?
No. The deed of sale or a mortgage document is not sufficient to convey ownership
of land. The mere execution of deeds of sale, mortgages, leases other voluntary
documents serves only two purposes:
As a contract between the parties
As evidence of authority to the Register of Deeds to register such documents
Sec. 51 of P.D. 1529. Conveyance and other dealings by registered owner. An
owner of registered land may convey mortgage, lease, charge or deal with the same in accordance with
existing laws. He/she may use such forms of deeds, mortgages,leases or other voluntary
documents/instruments as are sufficient in law. But no deed, mortgage, lease or other voluntary
documents, except a will purporting to convey or affect registered land, shall take effect as a
conveyance or bind the land but shall operate only as a contract between the parties and an evidence
of authority to the Register of Deeds to make registration.
Why is the registration of document/instrument important?
Registration of documents/instruments is the operative act that transmits or
transfers title. Absent such registration, a conveyance does not affect or bind the land. Thus, it has
been held that when a portion of registered property was sold and the sale was duly registered (and
annotated in the certificate of title of the vendor), the vendee technically becomes the owner of the
sold portion of the sale,notwithstanding that the title to the property is still in the name of the vendor.
The rule extends even to a sale of real estate as a result of a foreclosure or execution sale, which
becomes legally effective against third persons only from its registration.
Co - Owner ( Lot-1135-A )( 1444-A )( 53-A )Along the same vein, it was said that where there are
severalco-owners and some of them die, the heirs of those who die, withrespect to the part belonging
to the deceased, become also co-ownersof the property together with those who survive (Cid vs.
Peralta, 24Phil. 142).
Co-ownership; rights of the co-owners
In the City of Mandaluyong vs. Antonio Aguilar, et al., G.R. No.137152, Jan. 29, 2001, the effects of
co-ownership were once again explained. Under the co-ownership, the ownership of an undivided
thing or right belongs to different persons. During the existence of the co-ownership, no individual can
claim title to any definite portion of the community property until the partition thereof; and prior to the
partition, all that the co-owner has an ideal or abstract quota or proportionate share in the entire land
or thing. Article 493 of the Civil Code however provides that:
It is the essence and juridical nature of co-ownership that each co-owner is the owner of the whole,
and over the whole he exercises rights of dominion, but at the same time he is the owner of a part
which is truly abstract, because until division is effected, such part is not physically determined
(Moreno vs. Orendain, et al., 54 O.G. 1070; De Mesa vs. de Guzman, 63 O.G. 6, Feb. 5, 1967, C.A.).
(Italic ours.)
Article 493. Each co-owner shall have the full ownership of his part and of the fruits and benefits
pertaining thereto, and he may therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute another

person in its enjoyment, except when personal rights are involved. But the effect of the alienation or
the mortgage, with respect to the co owners shall be limited to the portion which may be allowed to
him in
the division upon termination of the co-ownership.
Once again the Supreme Court in Kilario vs. CA, G.R. No.134329, Jan. 19, 2000, said that an
extrajudicial settlement of estate is valid although executed in an unregistered private document. No
law requires partition among heirs to be in writing and registered to be valid. In fact, the requirement
that a partition be put into a public instrument and registered under Rule 74, Section 2, Rules of Court
has for its purpose the protection of creditors and the heirs themselves against tardy claims. The object
of registration is to serve as a constructive notice to others. The intrinsic validity of the
partition not executed with the prescribed formalities is not undermined when no creditors are
involved. Article 1358, NCC, requiring a public instrument for acts which have for their object the
creation, transmission, modification or extinguishment of real rights over immovable property is only
for convenience, noncompliance with which does not affect the validity or enforceability of the acts of
the parties among themselves. Neither does the statute of frauds under Article 1403, NCC apply
because partition among heirs is not legally deemed a conveyance of real property, considering that it
does not involve a transfer of property from one to the other but rather a confirmation or ratification of
title or right of property than an heir is renouncing in favor of another heir who accepts and receives
the inheritance (see also Heirs of Joaquin Teves vs. CA, 316 SCRA 632).23
Co-ownership; sale of the whole property; effect
Once again the Supreme Court in Tomas Claudio Memorial College, Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 124262,
Oct. 12, 1999, said that even if the co-owner sells the whole property as his, the sale will affect only
his share but not those of the co-owners who did not consent to the sale.
Under Article 493, NCC, the sale or other disposition affects only the sellers pro indiviso share and
the transferee gets only what corresponds to his grantors share in the partition of the property owned
in common. Since a co-owner is entitled to sell his undivided share, a sale of the entire property by
one co-owner is not null and void. However, only the rights of the co-owner/seller are transferred,
thereby making the buyer a co-owner of the property.
Along the same vein, it was ruled that pursuant to Article 494, NCC, no co-owner shall be obliged to
remain in the co-ownership. Such co-owner may demand at anytime the partition of the thing owned
in common, insofar as his share is concerned. No prescription shall lie in favor of a co-owner or coheirs as long as he expressly or impliedly recognizes the co-ownerhsip.
Public Land ( 4524 )
Sections 44 and 48 of the Public Land Act permit the acquisition of rights to public lands by
prescription under special conditions. These may be instances of laws enacted after the American
occupation, expressly recognizing rights to public lands, acquired thru possession and providing for
the confirmation of imperfect titles thus acquired (Li Seng Giap vs. Director of Lands, 59 Phil. 687
[1934]; Mercado vs. Municipal President of Macabebe, 59 Phil. 592 [1934]). (See also Republic Act
No. 1942, approved June 22,1957, amending Sec. 48(b), Com. Act No. 141, and Republic Act No.
2061, approved June 13,1958 as amended by P.D. No. 1073.).
Prescription( Lot-3373 )
A persons possession of a parcel of land covered by a TCT cannot render nugatory the right of the
holders of a certificate of title. The reason is that prescription does not run against registered land. A
title, once registered, cannot be defeated even by adverse,
open, and notorious possession. Moreover, in asserting ownership by donation, petitioners were in
effect assailing the title of respondents. A Torrens title cannot be collaterally attacked, the issue on its
validity can only be raised in an action expressly institute for that purpose (Ong, et al. vs. Sps.
Cabucos, G.R. No. 148056, Apr. 19,

2001; Baluyot vs. CA, G.R. No. 122947, July 27, 1999).