Case Digest (G.R. No. 146262)
Facts:
Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. v. Hon. Alfredo R. Enriquez, G.R. No. 146262, January 21, 2005, Supreme Court First Division, Carpio, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners are the heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr.; respondents are Hon. Alfredo R. Enriquez in his capacity as Administrator of the Land Registration Authority (LRA) and the Register of Deeds of Marikina City.
In 1966 Alfonso Sandoval and Roman Ozaeta, Jr. (the applicants) filed an application for registration of title before the Regional Trial Court (Land Registration Court) of Pasig City, Branch 152 (LRC No. N-18887). The court granted the application on 31 May 1966; that decision became final and executory and a certificate of finality was issued on 8 March 1991. The National Land Titles and Deeds Administration (now LRA) prepared Decree Nos. N-217643 and N-217644 dated 20 October 1977 which were entered and transcribed as OCT Nos. O-1603 and O-1604 in the Register of Deeds for Marikina on 18 August 1998; the Administrator later explained by letter of 1 December 1998 that the decrees had in fact been signed between 8 and 13 August 1998 and that the October 1977 dates were erroneous.
On 16 July 1997 petitioners filed in LRC No. N-18887 a motion asking the court to consider a Deed of Absolute Sale (dated 23 September 1970) by which Sandoval and Ozaeta allegedly sold the lots to the late Eugenio Lopez, Sr., and prayed for registration in the name of the buyer or his successors under Section 22 of PD No. 1529. After the OCTs were issued and transcribed, petitioners filed on 25 November 1998 a motion in the land registration case to declare Decree Nos. N-217643 and N-217644 and OCT Nos. O-1603 and O-1604 void; on the same date they applied to the Register of Deeds of Marikina to annotate a notice of lis pendens on the OCTs, attaching a copy of their November 1998 motion.
The Register of Deeds denied annotation on 15 December 1998 for lack of the original petition/complaint upon which to base action, and advised elevation in consulta to the LRA. Petitioners elevated the matter and the LRA docketed it as Consulta No. 2879; in its resolution dated 21 May 1999 the LRA held that a notice of lis pendens based on a mere motion is not registrable because only a party to the case may file a notice and petitioners, as movants, had not been admitted as parties since an order of general default had long bound the world i...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Whether petitioners’ motion to declare void the decrees issued by the Land Registration Authority is a proper basis for filing a notice of lis pendens?
- Whether petitioners can file that motion in LRC No. N-18887 despite the fact that the court’s general order of default ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)