Title
Pacifico S. Asico and Emma B. De Asico vs. Carmen Vasquez Trinidad
Case
G.R. No. L-7486
Decision Date
May 27, 1955
Petition for reconstitution of TCT No. 17920; court ruled only proven encumbrances should be annotated, rejecting unproven claims and invalidating undue delegation to Register of Deeds.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-7486)

Facts:

1. Initial Petition for Reconstitution:

  • On August 6, 1952, Pacifico S. Asico and Emma B. de Asico filed a petition in the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental for the reconstitution of the original and owner's duplicate of Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 17920 under Republic Act No. 26. The title covered Lot No. 990 of the Bago Cadastre, Negros Occidental, originally registered in the name of Hilarion Martir.

2. Ownership History:

  • Lot No. 990 was originally decreed and registered in the name of Gododredo Gison (Original Title No. 4193). Upon his death, the property was inherited by Amparo Gison, and TCT No. 17919 was issued in her name.
  • On July 18, 1936, TCT No. 17919 was canceled, and TCT No. 17920 was issued in the name of Hilarion Martir, who purchased the land from Amparo Gison.

3. Mortgage and Foreclosure:

  • On August 13, 1938, Hermogenes Martir, as heir of Hilarion Martir, mortgaged the land to Soledad Jalandoni. The mortgage was duly inscribed in the Register of Deeds on November 25, 1938, and noted on the back of TCT No. 17920.
  • In February 1941, Soledad Jalandoni initiated foreclosure proceedings, which culminated in the public auction of Lot No. 990 in October 1950. The property was sold to Pacifico Asico and his wife, and the sale was confirmed by the court and recorded in the Registry of Deeds.

4. Loss of Title and Reconstitution:

  • The original and owner's duplicate of TCT No. 17920 were lost during the war. The court ordered the Register of Deeds to reconstitute the title based on available records, including the canceled TCT No. 17919 and the deed of sale from Amparo Gison to Hilarion Martir.
  • The court included a proviso in its order, stating that all liens and encumbrances recorded in the Register of Deeds at the time of the title's loss would be annotated on the reconstituted title.

5. Objections and Motions:

  • The Asicos objected to the proviso, arguing it amounted to an undue delegation of judicial power to the Register of Deeds and could lead to the reconstitution of unproven encumbrances.
  • Carmen Vasquez Trinidad, an oppositor, claimed that Hermogenes Martir had sold the property to her with a pacto de retro on May 23, 1940, and the deed was registered on May 24, 1940. She sought to prove her claim but failed to appeal the denial of her motion.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Purpose of Reconstitution:

    • The purpose of reconstitution is to restore the title as it existed at the time of its loss. Only encumbrances proven in the proceedings should be annotated on the reconstituted title.
  2. Failure to Appeal:

    • A party who fails to appeal a denial of their motion loses the right to assert their claim in subsequent proceedings.
  3. Priority of Encumbrances:

    • Encumbrances recorded after a prior mortgage are subordinate to the rights of the mortgagee and subsequent purchasers at a foreclosure sale.
  4. Judicial Authority:

    • The court cannot delegate its judicial authority to the Register of Deeds to determine which encumbrances should be annotated on the reconstituted title. Such determinations must be made by the court based on evidence presented during the proceedings.


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.