Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 314 views

    Facts:: Version of Hi-Grade O. Version of CLT o

    Uploaded by

    Wendell Leigh Oasan
    The properties in dispute were formerly part of the Maysilo Estate spanning several cities in Metro Manila. One of the mother titles for the estate, OCT No. 994, was the subject of the litigation. CLT Realty and Hi-Grade Feeds both claimed ownership over Lot 26 based on conflicting titles traced back to OCT 994. The RTC ruled in favor of CLT, but the CA reversed, upholding Hi-Grade's title. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining the valid date of OCT 994, as only one true date of registration could exist. It ruled that the date appearing on the face of the title refers to the date of issuance of the registration decree, and therefore the earlier dated

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Facts:: Version of Hi-Grade O. Version of CLT o

    Uploaded by

    Wendell Leigh Oasan
    314 views2 pages
    The properties in dispute were formerly part of the Maysilo Estate spanning several cities in Metro Manila. One of the mother titles for the estate, OCT No. 994, was the subject of the litigation. CLT Realty and Hi-Grade Feeds both claimed ownership over Lot 26 based on conflicting titles traced back to OCT 994. The RTC ruled in favor of CLT, but the CA reversed, upholding Hi-Grade's title. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining the valid date of OCT 994, as only one true date of registration could exist. It ruled that the date appearing on the face of the title refers to the date of issuance of the registration decree, and therefore the earlier dated

    Original Description:

    law digest

    Original Title

    Clt vs Higrade

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The properties in dispute were formerly part of the Maysilo Estate spanning several cities in Metro Manila. One of the mother titles for the estate, OCT No. 994, was the subject of the litigation. CLT Realty and Hi-Grade Feeds both claimed ownership over Lot 26 based on conflicting titles traced back to OCT 994. The RTC ruled in favor of CLT, but the CA reversed, upholding Hi-Grade's title. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining the valid date of OCT 994, as only one true date of registration could exist. It ruled that the date appearing on the face of the title refers to the date of issuance of the registration decree, and therefore the earlier dated

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    314 views2 pages

    Facts:: Version of Hi-Grade O. Version of CLT o

    Uploaded by

    Wendell Leigh Oasan
    The properties in dispute were formerly part of the Maysilo Estate spanning several cities in Metro Manila. One of the mother titles for the estate, OCT No. 994, was the subject of the litigation. CLT Realty and Hi-Grade Feeds both claimed ownership over Lot 26 based on conflicting titles traced back to OCT 994. The RTC ruled in favor of CLT, but the CA reversed, upholding Hi-Grade's title. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining the valid date of OCT 994, as only one true date of registration could exist. It ruled that the date appearing on the face of the title refers to the date of issuance of the registration decree, and therefore the earlier dated

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    160684, September 02, 2015


    CLT REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. HI-GRADE FEEDS
    CORPORATION, REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (THROUGH THE OFFICE OF
    THE SOLICITOR GENERAL), REGISTRY OF DEEDS OF METRO MANILA,
    DISTRICT III, CALOOCAN CITY , AND THE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents.

    FACTS:

    The properties in dispute were formerly part of the notorious Maysilo Estate
    left by Gonzalo Tuason, the vastness of which measures 1,660.26 hectares,
    stretching across Caloocan City, Valenzuela, and Malabon, covered by five (5)
    mother titles or Original Certificate of Title (OCT). One of the mother titles is
    OCT No. 994, the mother title in dispute. Later on, smaller lots forming part
    of the Maysilo Estate were sold to different persons. Several subsequent
    subdivisions, consolidations, and one expropriation of the Estate, spawned
    numerous legal disputes, living-up to the name "Land of Caveat Emptor."1
    One of these disputed lots was Lot 26, the property subject of this
    litigation.

    The conflict arose due to an overlapping of the properties of CLT and HiGrade, which prompted CLT to file a case for Annulment of Transfer
    Certificates of Title, Recovery of Possession, and Damages before the
    Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City.

    VERSION OF HI-GRADE

    o .
    VERSION OF CLT
    o .
    RTC: Hi-Grade's title, the older title, cannot prevail over CLT's title because it

    CA: REVERSED RTC DECISION

    suffers from patent defects and infirmities. Although Hi-Grade paid realty
    taxes on the subject properties, it is not considered as a conclusive proof of
    ownership.
    o
    o

    upholding the validity of TCT Nos. 237450 and T-146941 of


    appellant Hi-Grade Feeds Corporation.
    During the pendency of the appeal, Hi-Grade filed a Motion to Admit
    and Take Judicial Notice of Committee Report on Senate Inquiry into
    Maysilo Estate Submitted by the Committees on Justice and Human
    Rights and on Urban Planning, Housing and Resettlement (Senate
    Report) on 1 July 1998. The Court of Appeals granted the motion in a
    Resolution9 dated 31 August 1998. Included in the Resolution,
    however, is a statement that although the Court of Appeals takes
    judicial notice of the Senate Report, the Court of Appeals is not bound
    by the findings and conclusions therein.10

    o In the meantime, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), on behalf

    of the Republic and in representation of the Administrator of the Land


    Registration Authority, filed a Petition for Intervention dated 25 August
    1998. The OSG averred that its intervention is indispensable as it is
    pursuant to its duty to preserve the integrity of the Torrens system of
    registration and to protect the Assurance Fund, in connection with
    which it can initiate necessary actions for the annulment of titles
    irregularly and fraudulently issued. The Court of Appeals granted the
    OSG motion. The Court of Appeals resolved the issue on intervention
    in the appealed Decision dated 18 June 2003. According to the Court
    of Appeals, due to the magnitude and significance that will affect the
    stability and integrity of the Torrens system, the State has sufficient
    interest in the case.

    ISSUE:
    Which of the OCTs 994, that dated 19 April 1917 or that dated 3 May 1917, is
    the valid title?
    HELD: The mother title, OCT 994

    A title can only have one date of registration, as there can only be one title
    covering the same property. The date of registration is reckoned from the
    time of the title's transcription in the record book of the Registry of Deeds. 25
    Therefore, the date appearing on the face of a title refers to the date of
    issuance of the decree of registration, as provided in Sections 41 and 42 of
    the Land Registration Act or Section 40 of the P.D. 1529:
    Section 41. Immediately upon the entry of the decree of registration
    the clerk shall send a certified copy thereof, under the seal of the
    court to the register of deeds for the province, or provinces or city in
    which the land lies, and the register of deeds shall transcribe the
    decree in a book to be called the "Registration Book," in which a leaf,
    or leaves, in consecutive order, shall be devoted exclusively to each
    title. The entry made by the register of deeds in this book in each
    case shall be the original certificate of title, and shall be signed by
    him and sealed with the seal of the court. x x x
    Section 42. This certificate shall take effect upon the date of the
    transcription of the decree.

    You might also like