Case Digest (G.R. No. 84888)
Facts:
Lunesa Balangcad v. Hon. Justices of the Court of Appeals, 5th Division, et al., G.R. No. 84888, February 12, 1992, First Division, Cruz, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Lunesa Balangcad was the registered owner of Lot No. 2858 under OCT No. P-152 / Free Patent Title No. 213712. The private respondents — who sued in Civil Case No. 1411 (filed May 19, 1980) — alleged that Lot No. 2858 was illegally registered in Balangcad’s name and sought quieting of title and reconveyance.
After trial before Judge Leopoldo B. Gironella, the Regional Trial Court of Bangued, Abra, rendered judgment annulling Balangcad’s OCT and Free Patent insofar as Lot No. 2858 and ordered the defendant to vacate the land. The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals, but the appeal was dismissed for non-payment of the docket fee (CA G.R. No. 12691, resolution of July 30, 1987); that dismissal became final and entry of judgment followed.
Approximately nine months after the Court of Appeals’ disposition, petitioner returned to the trial court seeking "annulment and/or reformation or novation" of the judgment for lack of jurisdiction — a pleading the trial court rejected. Petitioner then elevated the matter to the Supreme Court by way of a petition (challenging both the procedural finality and the merits of the underlying cancellation), prompting this decision. The Court considered procedural timeliness and, on the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is the petition to the Supreme Court procedurally barred as tardy?
- May a Torrens certificate of title be annulled after more than one year from registration when the land covered was originally private land and the registered title is alleged void ab initio?
- Were the private respondents entitled to reconveyance/quieting of title by virtue of acquisitive prescription despite the one-year rule of incontrovertibi...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)