Blondeau v Nano a party to the conspiracy, at least having by his negligence or

[G.R. No. 41377. July 26, 1935.] acquiescence made it possible for the fraud to transpire.
MALCOLM, J p:
6. As between two innocent persons, in this case Angela
Topic: Manner of Creation Blondeau and Jose Vallejo, one of whom must suffer the
Petitioners: ANGELA BLONDEAU and FERNANDO DE LA consequence of a breach of trust, the one who made it possible
CANTERA Y UZQUIANO by his act of confidence must bear the loss, in this case Jose
Respondent: AGUSTIN NANO and JOSE VALLEJO Vallejo.

Facts Held: Court sustained plaintiff’s mortgage and granted her the
1. This action was brought in the CFI of Manila to foreclose a relief prayed for in her complaints
mortgage alleged to have been made by the defendants to the
plaintiff to secure the payment of the sum of P12,000, and
covering property situated on Calle Georgia, Manila.
2. Nano, purporting to represent both defendants, after filing an
answer, was found in contempt of court. The other defendant
Vallejo thereupon presented an amended answer in which it was
alleged that his signature to the mortgage was a forgery.
Judgment was rendered against respondents
3. It was found that respondent Nanoowned accessorias bearing
Nos. 905A to 905F, Calle Georgia, Manila. The land was owned
by Jose Vallejo under a Torrens Title.
4. Respondents mortgaged the properties to plaintiff Angela
Blondeau to secure a loan in the amount of P12,000.
5. The mortgage was executed in the home of the plaintiffs in
the presence of a witness, Pedro Zoboli, who identified Vallejo
as the person who signed the document. Plaintiff's husband,
Fernando de la Cantera, found the registration of the properties
in due form, including the power of attorney of Vallejo, in favor
of Nano.
6. According to Vallejo, the mortgage was void because his
signature was forged.
It was also contended that the power of attorney of Vallejo in
favor of Nano as well as his possession of the former's title
papers, were the product of the evil machinations of Nano, and
that although Nano and Vallejo, while members of same family,
lived together, Vallejo was entirely unacquainted with the
activities of Nano in dealing with their joint property.

Issue: W/N the mortgage was validly executed – YES

Ratio
1. Upon its face, the mortgage appears to be regular and to have
been duly executed and accepted by Vallejo.

2. When Fernando de la Cantera, a member of the Philippine

bar and the husband of Angela Blondeau, the principal plaintiff,
searched the registration records, he found them in due form,
including the power of attorney of Vallejo in favor of Nano. If this
had not been so and if thereafter the proper notation of the
encumbrance could not have been made, Angela Blondeau
would not have lent P12,000 to the defendant Vallejo.

3. The Torrens system is intended for the registration of title,

rather than the muniments of title.

4. The Torrens Act permits a forged transfer, when duly entered

in the registry, to become the root of a valid title in a bona fide
purchaser.

An executed transfer of registered lands placed by the

registered owner thereof in the hands of another operates as a
representation to a third party that the holder of the transfer is
authorized to deal with the lands.

5. This is a case of a mortgagee relying upon a Torrens title, and

loaning money in all good faith on the basis of the title standing
in the name of the mortgagors only thereafter to discover one
defendant to be an alleged forger and the other defendant, if not