Undocumented

Land disputes are very common especially among relatives for lack of proper documents. This is what happened to Marta and Monica, only daughters of the deceased Minerva.

The parcel of rice-land involved here was originally owned by Minerva but only covered by a Tax Declaration. Before Minerva died she transferred the possession of the land in favor of her widowed daughter Monica who had four children. Monica took possession of the same and also obtained a new tax declaration in her name.

Needing some money, Monica obtained a loan from her sister Marta and transferred possession of the rice land to Marta so that Marta could gather its harvest and apply it to the payment of the loan. By virtue of this arrangement, the tax declaration over the land was also transferred in the name of Marta.

Monica however died before she could fully pay the loan leaving behind her children, Nita Lita, Andy and Boy as sole surviving heirs. Since the children were not aware of the arrangement between their mother and their auntie Marta, the latter was able to file an application for registration of the rice land in her name at the time when its value was already increasing because the town where it was located was no longer an agricultural area. She alleged in the application that she purchased the same from her mother Minerva when the latter was still alive but the corresponding deed of sale was already lost and no copies were available, and that no other person have interest therein. So the court granted the decree of registration and Marta was able to obtain title of the land in her name.

Later on Monica’s children who are the nieces and nephews of Marta learned about the titling of the land in Marta’s favor and about its history. So despite the lapse of about 20 years, they still filed a petition to review and reverse the decree of registration granted by the court in favor of Marta on the ground of fraud. Can Nita, Lita Andy and Boy still get the title to the land?

Yes. Marta was able to obtain title to the land only because of a false allegation made in bad faith. She kept secret the fact that she possessed the rice land only as a creditor under an arrangement known in law as “Antichresis” (Article 2132, Civil Code).

So the land registration court can reopen the proceedings because an antichretic creditor like Marta cannot ordinarily acquire by prescription the land surrendered to her by the antichretic debtor, her sister Monica. The fact that she has been in actual possession of the land given as security will not bar its registration in favor of the heirs of Monica who are her nephews and nieces. (Ramirez vs. Court of Appeals, 144, SCRA 292).

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor law and Criminal Law Vols. I and II are now available at 403 Sunrise Condominium, 226, Ortigas Ave. Greenhill, San Juan, tel 7249445.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]