May 6, 1991
Ponente: Medialdea, J.
FACTS:
Petitioner, a domestic corporation, filed an action for quieting of title against the respondent estate of Virata alleging that it is the registered owner of a parcel of land (a friar land) located at Imus, Cavite, which was covered by a Certificate of Title issued on February 24, 1976.
It was also alleged that Virata, during his lifetime thru the use of fraud, caused the issuance of Certificate of Title on September 1, 1959 thru an administrative reconstitution of a nonexistent original title covering the same parcel of land; that by reason of the said reconstitution and subsequent issuance of TCT, there now exists a cloud on the title of petitioner.
On the other hand, respondent Virata denied the allegations in the complaint, contending that his predecessor, one Mabini Legaspi, bought the subject property through a public bidding, wherein consequently, a TCT was issued in his name, and that subsequently a deed of sale was executed in favor of Virata.
Such deed was then registered with the Register of Deeds, who later on issued a TCT to Virata. However, the Provincial Capitol building of Cavite which housed the Registry of Deeds was burned, destroying land records and titles in d registry among which were the records relating to the subject property. Hence, the RD administratively reconstituted the original TCT based on owner's duplicate certificate.
RULING:
Whether petitioner’s contention is meritorious. - YES.
Without the certificate of sale to prove the transfer of the ownership of the land from the government Mabini Legaspi and without the required approval of the sale by the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce, he did not in any manner acquire ownership over the land in 1943.
The ownership or title over the subject land remained in the government until Peñaranda, petitioners predecessor, lawfully acquired ownership over the same lot on February 28, 1969 by virtue of a sales contract executed in his favor.
The issuance of a certificate of title in favor of Mabini Legaspi did not vest ownership upon respondent over the land nor did it validate the alleged purchase of the lot, which is null and void. Time and again, it has been held that registration does not vest title. It is merely evidence of such title over a particular property. Our land registration laws do not give the holder any better title than that what he actually has
Did petitioner’s action prescribe? - NO.
Although a period of one year has already expired from the time the certificate of title was issued to Mabini Legaspi pursuant to the alleged sale from the government, said title does not become incontrovertible but is null and void since the acquisition of the property was in violation of law.
Further, the petitioner herein is in possession of the land in dispute. Hence, its action to quiet title is imprescriptible.