Intolerable anomaly

An action to quiet title to property in one’s possession does not prescribe. This is the ruling applied in this case of Basilio who had been in peaceful and continuous possession in adverse manner of lot 452 since 1940.

Basilio’s case arose when the adjacent lot 450 containing an area of 4,960 sq.m. was surveyed on October 1, 1965 by a Cadastral Land Surveyor pursuant to the application for a free patent filed by Torio. Then on September 25, 1968, a Free Patent and Original Certificate Title (OCT) covering lot 450 were finally issued in the name of the heirs of Torio who had in the meantime died. The OCT was registered with the Register of Deeds on August 29, 1974.

In 1991, when the heirs of Torio subdivided lot 450 covered by the OCT, they learned for the first time that it included a 790 sq.m. portion of the adjacent lot 452 occupied and in possession of Basilio since 1940. Hence when Torio’s heirs started to take possession of said portion, Basilio filed a protest with the DENR on December 26, 1991 against the Free Patent and the OCT issued to the heirs of Torio. Basilio alleged that the 790 sq. m. portion of his lot 452 adjacent to lot 450 was erroneously included in the OCT.

After proper investigation, the DENR special investigator and the geodetic engineer who assisted him and conducted a survey of the adjoining lots 450 and 452 found that the disputed 790 sq.m. portion is really part of Basilio’s property. The sketch plan prepared by the surveyor clearly shows that said portion is within the property of Basilio and part of lot 452 taking into consideration the 57-year old coconut trees planted in a straight line which form a common natural boundary between the lots of the parties as admitted by the parties themselves.

The Director of Lands however failed to act on the recommendation of the DENR to file an action for the annulment of the Free Patent and the OCT by segregating from it the 790 sq.m. So on October 9, 1998, Basilio himself filed a complaint for annulment of the OCT, ejectment and damages.

Torio’s heirs however contended that Basilio’s action is already barred by prescription. They maintained that their OCT which was issued in 1968 and registered with the Register of Deeds in 1974 is already indefeasible when Basilio filed his complaint. Basilio’s action was already too late said Torio’s heirs. Were they correct?

No. Basilio’s action primarily seeks the re-conveyance of the disputed 790 sq.m. portion of land through the amendment of the OCT. An action for re-conveyance of property respects the decree of registration as incontrovertible and merely seeks the transfer of the property wrongfully or erroneously registered in another’s name to the rightful owner or to one who claims to have a better right.

The prescriptive period for the re-conveyance of registered property is ten years reckoned from the date of the issuance of the certificate of title. However the ten-year prescriptive period is not applicable where the complainant is in possession of the disputed property. In such a case an action for re-conveyance would be in the nature of an action to quiet title which is imprescriptible.

In this case, Basilio who has been in possession of the disputed portion since 1940 by himself and through his predecessors-in-interest is not barred from bringing this action against Torio’s heirs whose claim to the property is merely based on the OCT which mistakenly included the 790 sq.m. portion over which Basilio has a better right since he and his predecessors-in-interest had long been in possession of the same in concept of owner. Re-conveyance is just and proper to end the intolerable anomaly that patentees should have a Torrens Title for the land which has never been in their possession and which has been possessed by another person in the concept of owner. A person, whose certificate of title included by mistake or oversight the land owned by another does not become the owner of such land by virtue of the certificate alone. The Torrens system is intended to guarantee the integrity and conclusiveness of registration but it is not intended to perpetrate fraud against the real owner of the registered land (Heirs of Waga etc. vs. Sacabin, G.R. 159131, July 27, 2009)

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.

*     *      *

E-mail at: [email protected]