Title
Almirol vs. Register of Deeds of Agusan
Case
G.R. No. L-22486
Decision Date
Mar 20, 1968
Teodoro Almirol sought mandamus to compel registration of land purchased from Arcenio Abalo, but the Register of Deeds refused, citing conjugal property rules. The Supreme Court upheld dismissal, ruling mandamus improper as administrative remedies under RA 1151 were available.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-22486)

Facts:

  1. Purchase of Land: On June 28, 1961, Teodoro Almirol purchased a parcel of land in Esperanza, Agusan, from Arcenio Abalo. The land was covered by Original Certificate of Title No. P-1237, registered in the name of "Arcenio Abalo, married to Nicolasa M. Abalo."
  2. Attempted Registration: In May 1962, Almirol attempted to register the deed of sale with the Register of Deeds of Agusan to secure a transfer certificate of title in his name.
  3. Refusal to Register: The Register of Deeds refused registration, citing the following reasons:
    • The property was presumed conjugal, as it was registered in the name of Arcenio Abalo, married to Nicolasa M. Abalo.
    • Under the New Civil Code, both spouses must sign the document for the sale of conjugal property.
    • Since Nicolasa M. Abalo had already died at the time of the sale, the surviving husband (Arcenio Abalo) could not dispose of the entire property without violating the law.
    • The property needed to be liquidated and transferred to the surviving spouse and heirs of the deceased wife through an extrajudicial settlement or partition.
  4. Legal Action: Almirol filed a petition for mandamus in the Court of First Instance of Agusan (Special Civil Case No. 151) to compel the Register of Deeds to register the deed of sale and issue the transfer certificate of title. He also sought moral damages and attorney's fees.
  5. Respondent's Defense: The Register of Deeds reiterated the grounds for refusal and argued that Almirol had an alternative remedy by appealing to the Commissioner of Land Registration under Section 4 of Republic Act 1151.
  6. Lower Court Decision: The lower court dismissed the petition, ruling that mandamus did not lie because Almirol had an adequate remedy under Section 4 of Republic Act 1151.

Issue:

  1. Whether mandamus is the proper remedy to compel the Register of Deeds to register the deed of sale.
  2. Whether the Register of Deeds has the authority to determine the validity of the deed of sale.
  3. Whether the petitioner must first exhaust administrative remedies before resorting to judicial action.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the petition for mandamus. The Court held that:

  1. Mandamus does not lie because the petitioner had an adequate administrative remedy under Section 4 of Republic Act 1151, which requires the Register of Deeds to refer doubtful matters to the Commissioner of Land Registration.
  2. The Register of Deeds does not have the authority to determine the validity of the deed of sale; this function belongs to a court of competent jurisdiction.
  3. The petitioner must first exhaust the administrative remedy of referring the matter to the Commissioner of Land Registration before seeking judicial intervention.

Ratio:

  1. Role of the Register of Deeds: The Register of Deeds is not authorized to determine the validity of documents presented for registration. Their duty is ministerial, and any doubts regarding the proper step to be taken must be referred to the Commissioner of Land Registration.
  2. Purpose of Registration: The registration of instruments is intended to provide notice to the public. Questions regarding the validity or effect of instruments should be decided after registration, not before.
  3. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: Section 4 of Republic Act 1151 provides a clear administrative remedy for parties dissatisfied with the Register of Deeds' decision. This remedy must be exhausted before resorting to judicial action.
  4. Mandamus as a Remedy: Mandamus is not appropriate when there is an adequate alternative remedy available, such as the administrative process outlined in Section 4 of Republic Act 1151.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.