Case Digest (G.R. No. 131287)
Facts:
Petitioner Dinah C. Castillo, a judgment creditor of Raquel K. Moratilla, discovered that Lot No. 13713 in Brgy. Bugtongnapulo, Lipa City, Batangas (15,000 sqm) co-owned by Moratilla and her relatives was unregistered and covered only by tax declarations. After securing the necessary Department of Agrarian Reform conversion order and assessor’s certificates, Castillo levied on the property and bought Raquel’s one-third share at a public auction on May 14, 2002. She had notices, certificates of sale, affidavits and writ of execution recorded, and was duly issued Tax Declaration No. 00942-A for her 5,000 sqm share. When she attempted to pay realty tax, she learned that her tax declaration was cancelled without notice. Instead, Tax Declaration No. 00949-A was issued in the name of Francisco Catigbac, whose Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 129642 had been cancelled and replaced on July 25, 2002 by TCT No. T-134609 in favor of Summit Point Realty and Development Corporation. CCase Digest (G.R. No. 131287)
Facts:
- Background and Judicial Sale
- Dinah C. Castillo, judgment creditor of Raquel K. Moratilla, discovered Lot 13713 (15,000 sqm) in Lipa City co-owned by Raquel, her mother Urbana Kalaw, and sister Perla Moratilla, covered by Tax Declaration (TD) No. 00449.
- Castillo secured:
- DAR conversion Order approving Summit Point Golf & Country Club’s application to convert Lot 13713.
- City Assessor’s Certification confirming co-owners and tax declaration.
- Register of Deeds Certification that Lot 13713 had no Torrens title.
- Castillo levied on and bought at public auction (May 14, 2002) Raquel’s 1/3 share (5,000 sqm); recorded Notice of Levy, Certificate of Sale, Affidavit of Publication, Writ of Execution; obtained TD No. 00942-A in her name.
- Overlapping Torrens Title and Title Conversion
- In May 2002 Castillo learned Lot 13713 overlapped with Lot 1-B (105,648 sqm) titled under TCT No. 129642 in the name of Francisco Catigbac. Entries showed:
- Special Power of Attorney (SPA) to Leonardo Yagin (1976).
- Deed of Absolute Sale to Summit Point Realty & Development Corp.
- BIR Clearance and cancellation of TCT No. 129642; issuance of TCT No. T-134609 to Summit (July 25, 2002).
- Castillo’s TD No. 00942-A was cancelled without notice; City Assessor issued TD No. 00949-A in Catigbac’s name.
- Complaint-Affidavit and Ombudsman Proceedings
- Castillo filed Complaint-Affidavit before the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon (OMB-L-A-03-0573-F; OMB-L-C-03-0728-F), charging:
- Register of Deeds Antonio Escutin; City Assessor officers Aquilina Mistas and Marietta Linatoc; and Summit officers Lauro Leviste II and Benedicto Orense.
- Violations of RA 3019 § 3(e) for conspiring to cancel Castillo’s TD and unlawfully issue TD No. 00949-A.
- Castillo sought registration of her Sheriff’s Deed of Final Sale and annotation of an Adverse Claim on TCT No. T-134609; Escutin denied registration per Examiner Sta. Ana’s Order, pending LRA consulta.
- Respondents’ Counter-Affidavits
- Escutin: ministerial duty under PD 1529 § 56; documents (DAR clearance, BIR CAR, transfer tax, Secretary’s Certificate, etc.) were submitted; cannot probe intrinsic validity; not responsible for tax declarations.
- Mistas: not custodian of records; no authority over tax declaration cancellations.
- Linatoc: ministerial role to cancel old and prepare new tax declarations after other divisions’ review.
- Leviste & Orense: good faith purchase under valid TCT; Deed of Sale properly signed; collateral attack on Torrens title improper.
- Ombudsman and CA Resolutions
- Deputy Ombudsman Joint Resolution (April 28, 2004): dismissed administrative and criminal charges for lack of evidence and jurisdiction (pending LRA consulta).
- Joint Order (June 20, 2005): denied reconsideration; noted separate registration systems (Torrens vs. unregistered land) and Castillo’s withdrawal of LRA appeal.
- Court of Appeals Decision (Oct. 18, 2005, CA-G.R. SP 90533): affirmed Ombudsman dismissals for lack of merit and no grave abuse of discretion; Reconsideration denied (Jan. 11, 2006).
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the cancellation of Castillo’s TD No. 00942-A in violation of Section 109, PD 1529?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in ruling that respondents (Escutin, Mistas, Linatoc) could not be held administratively liable for favoring Summit Realty to Castillo’s damage?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)