Cagayan State University

College of Law

Course Outline
Registration of Land Titles and Deeds

Atty. Ismael T. Manaligod

I. Land Administration (Lecture)

1. Definition
2. Components
3. Purpose
4. Land Administration Agencies and Functions
5. Land Surveys and Boundaries

II. History of the Torrens Systems and Land Registration Laws in the
Philippines

1. Evolution of Land Laws in the Philippines (Lecture)

Case
- Cruz v. Secretary of ENR, G.R. No. 135385.
December 6, 2000, Read separate opinion by Justice
Puno and Justice Kapunan

III. Modes of Acquiring Title to Land

a. Public Grant
b. Disposition of Land under the Civil Code
i. Accretion (page 108 2011 agcaoili)

Cases:

- Grande v. CA GR L-17652, June 30, 1962

- Cureg v. Intermediate Appellate Court, [GR No.
73465, Sept. 7, 1989
- Agustin v. IAC July 5, 1990- Commented [im1]: -abrupt shift of river
- Republic v. Santos, GR 160453, November 12, accretion is not lost

2012 –
Commented [im2]: -notation in the GE
- Fernando v. Acuna GR 161030 September 14,
plan not applicable
2011-
- Commented [im3]: dried up river bed belongs to the
state

1
 ii. Succession (Article 774, 777 NCC)
iii. Donation (Article 725 NCC) Commented [im4]: Donation of Real
Property must be in an PI, accepted in same
Case or diff PI (Art 749). Affidavit of Partition
suffers from some infirmities (not accepted)
- Arangote v. Maglungob GR 178906 Feb 18, 2009
Commented [im5]: contract of sale Art
iv. Sale (Article 1458 NCC) 1458- no specific form hence technical
description need not be indicated for as
Cases long as specific object (here lots) were
indicated
- Naranja v. CA GR 160132 April 17, 2009 – valid
Undue influence is not to be inferred from
- Claudel v. CA GR 85240 July 12, 1991 age sickness or disability if sufficient
intelligence remains

v. Prescription (Article 1117-18; Article 1137, NCC)
Cases
- Beinvenido v. Gabriel GR 175763, April 11, 2012
Acquisitive prescription
- Sps. Aguirre v. Villanueva, GR 1698898 October 27,
2006
- Heirs of Arzadon-Crisologo v. Ranon GR 171068
September 5, 2007
c. Disposition under other laws
i. Escheat (Rule 91, Special Proceedings, Article 1011-1014 NCC)
ii. Eminent Domain (Section 9, Article III 1987 Constitution)
iii. CARP (RA 6657)
IV. DISPOSITION OF LANDS BY PUBLIC GRANT
1. Regalian Doctrine (page 1 Agcaoili)
b. Concept
c. Regalian Doctrine Does not Negate Native Title
d. Imperium vs Dominium (page 633 Agcaoili)
Cases:
Commented [im6]: Acquisitive prescription is a mode
of acquiring ownership by a possessor through the
requisite lapse of time. In order to ripen into ownership,
possession must be in the concept of an owner, public,
peaceful and uninterrupted. 39 Possession is open when
it is patent, visible, apparent, notorious and not
clandestine.40 It is continuous when uninterrupted,
unbroken and not intermittent or occasional; exclusive
when the adverse possessor can show exclusive
dominion over the land and an appropriation of it to his
own use and benefit; and notorious when it is so
conspicuous that it is generally known and talked of by
the public or the people in the neighborhood. The party
who asserts ownership by adverse possession must
prove the presence of the essential elements of
acquisitive prescription.41
On the matter of prescription, the Civil Code provides:
Art. 1117. Acquisitive prescription of dominion and
other real rights may be ordinary or extraordinary.
Ordinary acquisitive prescription requires possession of
things in good faith and with just title for the time fixed
by law.
Art. 1134. Ownership and other real rights over
immovable property are acquired by ordinary
prescription through possession of ten years.
Art. 1137. Ownership and other real rights over
immovables also prescribe through uninterrupted
adverse possession thereof for thirty years, without
need of title or of good faith. (Emphasis supplied.)
Petitioners’ adverse possession is reckoned from 1969 with
the issuance of TD No. 1145 in the name of Araceli Tanyag,
which tax declaration cancelled TD No. 6425 in the name of
Jose Gabriel.42 It is settled that tax receipts and declarations
are prima facie proofs of ownership or possession of the
property for which such taxes have been paid. Coupled with
proof of actual possession of the property, they may
become the basis of a claim for ownership.43 Petitioners’
caretaker, Juana Quinones, has since lived in a nipa hut,
planted vegetables and tended a piggery on the land. Aside
from paying taxes due on the property, petitioners also
exercised other acts of ownership such as selling the 468-
square meter portion to Sta. Barbara who had constructed
thereon a nine-door apartment building
Commented [im7]:
Commented [im8]: Imperium – sovereignity dominium-
capacity to own land in its proprietary capacity

2
 - Secretary of DENR v. Yap, G.R. No. 167707. October
8, 2008
- Collado v. CA GR 107764, October 4, 2002
- Valiao v. Republic GR 170757 November 28, 2011
- Hermoso v. CA GR 166748 April 24, 2009
- Carino v. Insular Government G.R. No. 2869 March
25, 1907
- the land was proclaimed as not subject to alienation
2. Lands of the Public Domain (page 636 Agcaoili; Chapter I Albano)
a. Sections 3 and 4 Article XII 1987 Constitution
b. Public Land Act and Property Registration Decree :
Differences
c. DENR Secretary and LMB Director: Functions
d. Section 3 PD 705 Revised Forestry Code, Sections 2 and 8
CA 141 Public Land Act)
e. Only A&D Lands are subject of disposition
Cases:
- Republic v. Herbieto, G.R. No. 156117. May 26,
2005
- Omandam v. CA GR 128750 January 18, 2001
- Bagunu v. Aggabao 186487 August 15, 2011
- Gordula v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 127296, Jan. 22,
1998
3. Classification of Public Lands (page 202 Agcaoili)
a. Executive Privilege
b. System of Classification
c. Requirements to Establish Classification
d. Burden of Proof rests with applicant
Cases:
- Republic v. Fabio, GR No. 159589, Dec. 23, 2008
- Yngson v. Secretary of DENR, GR No. L-36847, July
20, 1983
- Republic v. CA, Carag, GR No. 155450, Aug. 6, 2008
- Republic v. Iglesia ni Cristo, GR No. 180067, June
30, 2009
3
Commented [im9]: Forest cannot be
registered. President has prerogative to
classify unclassified land of the public
domain which are considered public forest
under PD 705. CARL Section 4a refers only
to reclassification
Commented [im10]: Applicant in an LRC case based on
Sec 48b must show proof that land is A and D
One claiming private rights must show proof that he has
complied with the period and quality of possession before
LRC has no jurisdiction over non-registreable property
hence annulment of judgment is allowed
Commented [im11]: Land is unclassified hence cannot be
registered
Where in a cadastral case the land was previously adjudged
as public it can be subj of another LRC as long as applicant
can prove requirements of Sec 48b
Commented [im12]: Classification is primary and
secondary
Primary-FMNA Sec 3 Art XII
Secondary
Section 20 LGC
Section 65 CARL
Commented [im13]: It might, perhaps, be proper and
sufficient to say that when, as far back as testimony or
memory goes, the land has been held by individuals
under a claim of private ownership, it will be presumed
to have been held in the same way from before the
Spanish conquest, and never to have been public land
Commented [im14]: Difference bet PRD and PLA- PRD
confirm title already vested; PLA-land is public
Hence comply with Sec 48b and procedure of PRD
Commented [im15]: Court has jurisdiction over questions
of possession involving public land but once DENR has
decided the court is now divested of jurisdiction
Commented [im16]: Primary jurisdiction of the denr to
determine identity of the land subject of free patent
application
Commented [im17]: Possession of Forest land no matter
how long cannot convert the land into A&D
Private rights in proclamations-applicant must have
complied with the requirements of PLA
Commented [im18]: One claiming private rights must
have at least complied with possession requirements prior
to segregation by proclamation
Commented [im19]: Fishpond concession-no preferential
right if land not yet AD
Commented [im20]: Courts have at one point power to
determine w/n land is agricultural
Commented [im21]: Reiterates malabanan ruling
 4. Non-Registrable Properties (page 216 Agcaoili)

a. Public Dominion
- Public Use and Public Service
- Patrimonial
b. Forest Lands
c. Watersheds
d. Mangrove Swamps
e. Mineral Lands
f. National Parks
g. Military or Naval Reservations
h. Foreshore lands and Reclaimed Lands
i. Lakes
j. Navigable Rivers
k. Creeks
l. Reservations for public and semi-public purposes

Cases

- Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, [GR No. 133250, July

9, 2002
- MIAA v. CA GR 155650 July 20, 2006
- Ramos v. Director of Lands, GR No. 13298, Nov. 19, 1918
- Amunategui v. Director of Forestry, GR No. L-27873, Nov.
29, 1983
- Sta. Rosa Realty Development Corporation v. Court of
Appeals, GR No. 112526, Oct. 12, 2001
- Palomo v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 95608, Jan. 21, 1997
- Republic v. Southside Homeowners Association, Inc., GR
No. 156951, Sept. 22, 2006
- Republic v. CA and Republic Real Estate Corporation, GR
Nos. 103882 and 105276, Nov. 25, 1998 (see J. Puno
concurring opinion)
- Almagro vs Kwan, GR 175806, October 20, 2010
- Republic v. Alagad, GR No. 66807, Jan. 26, 1989
- Republic, rep. by the Mindanao Medical Center v. CA,
September 30, 1976
5. Disposition under the Public Land Act and Other Land Laws (page
649 Agcaoili; page 35-59 Albano)
Commented [im22]: Airport is property of public
dominion (art 420) and beyond the commerce of men,
hence cannot be subject of auction sale
SECTION 88. The tract or tracts of land reserved under the
provisions of Section eighty-three shall be non-alienable and
shall not be subject to occupation, entry, sale, lease, or
other disposition until again declared alienable under the
provisions of this Act or by proclamation of the President
MIAA is a mere trustee of the Republic
Commented [im23]: When the claim of the citizen and
the claim of the Government as to a particular piece of
property collide, if the Government desires to demonstrate
that the land is in reality a forest, the Director of Forestry
should submit to the court convincing proof that the land is
not more valuable for agricultural than for forest purposes.
Commented [im24]: This Court ruled in the leading case
of Director of Forestry v. Muñoz (23 SCRA 1184) that
possession of forest lands, no matter how long, cannot
ripen into private ownership
forested area classified as forest land of the public domain
does not lose such classification simply because loggers or
settlers may have stripped it of its forest cover. Parcels of
land classified as forest land may actually be covered with
grass or planted to crops by kaingin cultivators or other
farmers

a. Reason for the Patent System

4
 - Kasilag v. Rodriguez, GR 46623, December 7, 1939-
see dissenting opinion of Justice Moran

b. A&D Land Limited to 12 hectares under 1987 Consitution

c. Homestead Patent (see PD 532)

- Lopez v. CA GR 127827 March 5, 2003

- Nieto v. Quines, GR No. L-14634, Jan. 28, 1961
- Flores v. Bagaoisan, [GR No. 173365, April 15, 2010

d. Free Patent and Residential Free Patent under RA 10023

- Del Rosario-Igtiben v. Republic, [GR No. 158449,

Oct. 22, 2004

e. Sales Patent under CA 141 and Sales of Agricultural

Residential Land under RA 730

- Dela Rosa v. Valdez July 27, 2011

- Agura v. Serfino, GR No. 50685, Dec. 4, 1991

f. Lease

g. Reservations (page 84-96, Agcaoili)

- International Hardwood and Veneer Co. v. University

of the Philippines, [GR No. 521518, Aug. 13, 1991
- Republic v. Doldol, [GR No. 132963, Sept. 10, 1998
h. Special Patent

i. Friar Lands

- Pugeda v. Tnias, [GR No. L-16925, March 31, 1962

- Solid State Multi-Products Corporation v. Court of
Appeals, [GR No. 83383, May 6, 1991

V. Original Registration

1. Torrens System (page 55-60, Agcaoili)

a. Purpose
b. Characteristics

5
 c. System of Registration
2. Nature of Registration Proceedings (Chapter I, Agcaoili)
Cases
- Legarda v. Saleeby, G.R. No. L-8936 October 2,
1915
- Grey Alba v. Dela Cruz Sept. 16, 1910
- Republic v. Umali, G.R. No. 80687 April 10, 1989
- Pino v. CA, G.R. No. 94114 June 19, 1991
- Traders Royal Bank v. CA, GR 114299. September
24, 1999
- Casimiro Devt. Corp. v. Mateo, G.R 175485. July 27,
2011
- Peralta v. Abalon June 30, 2014
- Wee v. Mardo June 4, 2014
3. Jurisdiction
Cases
- Rudolf Lietz v. ROD of Paranaque City, GR 133240,
Nov. 15, 2000
- SM Prime Holdings, Inc. v. Madayag, GR 164687,
Feb. 12, 2009
4. Status of Other Pre-existing Land Registration Systems
Case
- Evangelista v. Santiago, [GR No. 157447, April 29,
2005
- Intestate Estate of Don Mariano San Pedro v. Court
of Appeals GR No. 103727, Dec. 1, 1996
5. The Land Registration Authority/ Register of Deeds (Chapter II,
Agcaoili)
Cases
- Angeles v. Sec. of Justice, [GR No. 142549, March 9,
2010
6
Commented [M25]: As was said above, the primary and
fundamental purpose of the torrens system is to quiet title.
If the holder of a certificate cannot rest secure in this
registered title then the purpose of the law is defeated. If
those dealing with registered land cannot rely upon the
certificate, then nothing has been gained by the registration
and the expense incurred thereby has been in vain. If the
holder may lose a strip of his registered land by the method
adopted in the present case, he may lose it all
Commented [im26]: quiet title to a land sec 39 holder for
value without knowledge of fraud or foregery. Purpose of
torren system is to guaranty integrity of land titles and
protect their indefeasibility
Commented [M27]: The main purpose of the torrens
system is to avoid possible conflicts of title to real estate
and to facilitate transactions relative thereto by giving the
public the right to rely upon the face of a Torrens certificate
of title and to dispense with the need of inquiring further,
except when the party concerned has actual knowledge of
facts and circumstances that should impel a reasonably
cautious man to make such further inquiry.
The Torrens system was adopted in this country because it
was believed to be the most effective measure to guarantee
the integrity of land titles and to protect their indefeasibility
once the claim of ownership is established and recognized.
Commented [M28]: The appellate court cited Fule v.
Legare26 as basis for its ruling. In the said case, the
Court made an exception to the general rule that a
forged or fraudulent deed is a nullity and conveys no
title. A fraudulent document may then become the root
of a valid title, as it held in Fule:
Although the deed of sale in favor of John W. Legare was
fraudulent, the fact remains that he was able to secure a
registered title to the house and lot. It was this title which
he subsequently conveyed to the herein petitioners. We
have indeed ruled that a forged or fraudulent deed is a
nullity and conveys no title (Director of Lands vs. Addison,
49 Phil., 19). However, we have also laid down the doctrine
that there are instances when such a fraudulent document ...
Commented [im29]: the govt should be the first to
accept the validity of the torrens system once the
conditions laid down by law are satisfied. Registration is not
a mode of acquiring ownership. Clean titile under sec 44
Commented [im30]: innocent purchaser for value
Commented [M31]: A land registration court has no
jurisdiction to order the registration of land already decreed
in the name of another in an earlier land registration case. A
second decree for the same land would be null and void,
since the principle behind the original registration is to
register a parcel of land only once
Commented [M32]: Nature of registration proceedings;
jurisdiction of courts. --- Judicial proceedings for the
registration of lands throughout the Philippines shall be in
rem and shall be based on the generally accepted principles
underlying the Torrens system.
...
Commented [M33]: MAYSILO ESTATE
 - Guaranteed Homes, Inc. v. Valdez, GR No. 171531,
Jan. 30, 2009
- De Leon v. De Leon, [GR No. 185063, July 23, 2009
- Alinas v. Alinas, [GR No. 158040, April 14, 2008
- Fudot v. Cattleya Land, Inc., [GR No. 171008, Sept.
13, 2007
- Pabaus v. Yutiamco July 27, 2011

6. Ordinary Registration Proceedings (Chapter III, Agcaoili)

a. Application

- Citizenship Requirement (page 184, Agcaoili)

Cases

- Krivenko v. Register of Deeds, GR No. L-630, Nov.

15, 1947
- Borromeo v. Descallar, GR No. 159310, Feb. 24,
2009
- Matthews v. Taylor, [GR No. 164584, June
22,2009
- Hulst v. PR Builders, Inc., [GR No. 156364, Sept.
25, 2008
- Cheesman v. IAC, G.R. No. 74833 January 21,
1991
- Muller v. Muller, G.R. No. 149615 August 29,
2006
- Phil. Banking Corp. v. Lui She, G.R. No. L-17587.
Sept. 12, 1967
- Ramirez v. Vda. de Ramirez, G.R. No. L-27952
February 15, 1982
- Ting Ho, Jr. v. Teng Gui, G.R. No. 130115. July
16, 2008

- Corporations

Cases

- Register of Deeds of Rizal v. Ung Sui Si Temple,

[GR No. L-6776, May 21, 1955

7
 - Roman Catholic Apostolic Administrator of Davao
v. Land Registration Commission [GR No. L-8451,
Dec. 20, 1957
- Rural Bank of Anda v. Arch. of Lingayen GR
155051 May 29, 2007

- Registration under Property Registration Decree

Cases

- Republic v. CA and Naguit, GR No 144057,

January 17,2005
- Heirs of Malabanan v. Republic, G.R. No.
179987. April 29, 2009; Resolution of MR GR
179987, Sept. 3, 2013
- Gaerlan v. Republic, March 12, 2014
- City Mayor of Parafiaque City v. Ebio, GR No.
178411, June 23, 2010
- Republic v. East Silverlane, GR 186961 Feb. 20,
2012
- Republic v. Zuburban Realty, GR 164408 March
24, 2012
- Dream Village v. BCDA, GR 192896 July 24, 2013

- Registration under Section 48(b) CA 141

Cases

- Republic v. Doldol, [GR No. 132963, Sept. 10,

1998
- Republic v. Remman Enterprises GR 199310 Feb
19, 2014
- Republic v. Court of Appeals and Bernabe, [GR
No. L-40402, March 16, 1987
- Republic v. Court of Appeals and Ceniza, [GR No.
127060, Nov. 19, 2002

- Oh Cho v. Director of Lands, G.R. No. L-48321.

August 31, 1946
- Diaz v. Republic, GR No. 181502, Feb. 2, 2010
(Resolution)

- Registration under IPRA (RA 8371)

8
 b. Publlication, Opposition and Default

Cases

- Director of Lands v. CA, G.R. No. 102858. July 28,

1997
- Francisco v. CA, G.R. No. L-35787 April 11, 1980
- Republic v. Herbieto, G.R. No. 156117. May 26,
2005
- Fieldman Agricultural Trading Corporation v.
Republic, [GR No. 147359, March 28, 2008
- Republic v. Bantigue March 14, 2012
- Republic v. PEZA March 6, 2013
- Republic v. Court of Appeals and Paredes, [GR No.
112115, March 9, 2001
- De Castro v. Marcos, [GR No. L-26093, Jan. 27,
1969
- Republic v. Tiotioen, [GR No. 167215, Oct. 8, 2008
- Martinez v. Republic, [GR No. 160895, Oct. 30, 2006

- Albano v. CA, G.R. No. 144708. August 10, 2001

- City of Davao v. Monteverde-Consunji, G.R. No.
136825. May 21, 2001
- Heirs of Lopez v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 146262.
January 21, 2005
- Vergel v. CA, G.R. No. 125154. September 28, 2001
- Yabut Lee vs. Punzalan, G.R. No. L-50236 August
29, 1980

c. Hearing, Judgment and Decree of Registration

ii. Specific Evidence of Ownership

Cases

- Flores v. Bagaoisan, [GR No. 173365, April 15, 2010

9
 - Republic v. Castuera, GR 203384, Jan 14, 2015
- Republic v. Guinto-Aldana, [GR No. 175578, Aug.
11, 2010
- Republic v. Munoz, [GR No. 151910, Oct. 15, 2007
- Dichoso v. Court of Appeals, [GR No. 55613, Dec.
10, 1990
- Ong v. Republic, [GR No. 175746, March 12, 2008
- Republic v. Manna Properties, Inc., [GR No. 146527,
Jan. 31, 2005
- Consolidated Rural Bank (Cagayan Valley), Inc. v.
Court of Appeals, [GR No. 132161, Jan. 17, 2005
- Llanes v. Republic, [GR No. 177947, Nov. 27, 2008

VI. Certificate of Title (Chapter IV, Agcaoili)

Cases

- Top Management Programs v. Fajardo, June 15,

2011
- Francisco v. Rojas April 23, 2014
- Del Prado v. Caballero March 3, 2010
- Homeowner’s Savings v. Felonia February 26, 2014
- Cusi v. Domingo February 27, 2013
- Eagle Realty v. Republic July 4, 2008
- Alde v. Bernal March 18, 2010
- De Leon v. De Leon July 23, 2009
- Republic v. Mendoza August 8, 2010
- Fernando v. Acuna, September 14, 2011
- Republic v. Samson-Tatad, April 1, 2013
- Oliveros v. SMC February 1, 2012

VII. Subsequent Registration

1. Voluntary
2. Involuntary

VIII. Remedies (Book 3 of Bilog; page 297-386 Agcaoili)

Reminders:

1. Additional cases may be assigned.

2. Grading:

10
 i. Attendance 10%
ii. Recitation 20%
iii. Mid-term Examination 30%
iv. Final Examination 40%

References:
1. Property Registration Decree and Related Laws
Justice Oswaldo Agcaoili 2015 Edition (TEXTBOOK)s
2. Land Titles and Deeds
Gregorio Bilog Jr. 2005 Edition
3. Land Titles and Deeds
Ed Vincent A. Albano III
4. Publications on Land Administration by DENR LMB

11