Case Digest (G.R. No. 127842)
Facts:
Demetrio Manalo and his nephew, Severino Manalo, executed a “Kasulatan ng Hatian ng Lupa” on August 4, 1960 before a notary, allegedly partitioning lands previously covered by an earlier 1952 extrajudicial partition. The document was recorded in the Registry of Deeds of Rizal on August 25, 1960, and Demetrio later applied for land registration in the Court of First Instance of Rizal (Land Registration Case No. N-6347), where Severino opposed on the ground that his signature in the 1960 instrument was fraudulently secured, while seeking registration in his own name. Branch VIII overruled Severino’s opposition and, in a decision dated October 9, 1970, decreed registration in Demetrio’s name.After the land registration decision became final and executory, the children of Severino—Inocencio, Priscilla, Teodora, Elena and Lope—without joining their father, filed Civil Case No. 13708 in Branch X for annulment of the 1960 partition instrument on the ground of fraud. Demetrio moved to
Case Digest (G.R. No. 127842)
Facts:
- Ownership and early transfers of the land
- Pedro Manalo owned a parcel of land located at Barrio Ususan, Pateros, near Taguig, Rizal.
- Pedro Manalo died in 1901.
- The land was inherited by his daughter, Teodora Manalo.
- Teodora Manalo died.
- The land was inherited by her son, Francisco Ymzon.
- Francisco Ymzon donated the land to his first cousins, the brothers Demetrio Manalo and Mamerto Manalo.
- On April 30, 1952, Demetrio Manalo and Mamerto Manalo partitioned the land into two equal parts.
- The land area was one thousand four hundred seventy-four (1,474) square meters and was covered by Tax Declaration No. 6746 in the name of Teodora Manalo (Exh. J, *Reparticion Extrajudicial*).
- Mamerto Manalo died in 1956.
- Mamerto Manalo’s one-half share was inherited by his son, Severino Manalo.
- The 1960 partition agreement and its recording
- On August 4, 1960, Demetrio Manalo and his nephew Severino (son of Mamerto Manalo) executed a document entitled “Kasulatan ng Hatian ng Lupa” (Exh. 6 or K) before the same notary who had notarized the 1952 extrajudicial partition (Exh. J).
- The “Kasulatan” referred to three parcels of land covered by Tax Declarations Nos. 1249, 856 and 1368 in the name of Mamerto Manalo with areas of 768, 4,706 and 1,286 square meters, respectively.
- The “Kasulatan” recited that Demetrio Manalo and Severino were the owners (“tunay at ganap na mayari lamang”) of the said three parcels of land.
- In the partition, Demetrio Manalo was given:
- In the partition, Severino Manalo was allocated:
- As stipulated in the “Kasulatan” and in conformity with Act No. 3344 amending section 194 of the Revised Administrative Code regarding the registry for unregistered lands, the document was recorded in the Registry of Deeds of Rizal on August 25, 1960 (Entry No. 17079, Page 193, Volume 85, File No. 17079; Exh. K-1).
- Land registration case (LRC Case No. N-6347) and the issue of fraud raised there
- On March 6, 1968, Demetrio Manalo filed an application in the Court of First Instance of Rizal for the registration of the lands he acquired under the 1952 and 1960 partitions.
- The lands were identified as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Plan Psu-191273 with a total area of four thousand forty-five (4,045) square meters (LRC Case No. N-6347).
- The case was assigned to Pasig Branch VIII.
- Severino Manalo opposed the application.
- Severino Manalo averred that his signature to the “Kasulatan ng Hatian ng Lupa” dated August 4, 1960 was fraudulently secured by Demetrio Manalo.
- Severino Manalo filed a counter-petition for the registration of Lots 1 to 5 in his name.
- At the inception of the hearing, Severino Manalo withdrew his opposition to the registration of Lots 4 and 5.
- He confined his opposition to Lots 1, 2 and 3.
- After the hearing, the lower court (Branch VIII) overruled Severino Manalo’s opposition.
- The lower court decreed the registration of the five lots in the name of Demetrio Manalo.
- In its decision dated October 9, 1970, Branch VIII found that the partition dated August 5, 1960 was valid.
- Severino Manalo did not testify regarding the alleged fraud.
- Inocencio, Severino Manalo’s son, testified that Severino Manalo was defrauded.
- The lower court did not give credence to Inocencio’s testimony.
- Severino Manalo could not perfect an appeal; the decision became final and executory.
- On October 2, 1971, the lower court ordered the issuance of the corresponding decree.
- Civil Case No. 13708 in Pasig Branch X for annulment of the partition agreement
- On July 31, 1970, before the land registration case terminated, the children of Severino Manalo—Inocencio, Priscilla, Teodora, Elena and Lope—filed a petition for the annulment of the “Kasulatan ng Hatian sa Lupa” (Civil Case No. 13708).
- Severino Manalo was not joined as a party.
- The petition relied on the allegation that their father, having inadequate education, signed the “Kasulatan” due to Demetrio Manalo’s false and fraudulent representation that Demetrio was an heir of Mamerto Manalo, the father of Severino.
- The case was assigned to Pasig Branch X.
- Demetrio Manalo’s motion to dismiss and Branch X’s denial
- Demetrio Manalo filed a motion to dismiss Civil Case No. 13708 on the grounds that:
- Branch X denied the motion to dismiss in Orders of March 10 and July 17, 1971.
- Branch X ruled that the land registration decision did not constitute res judicata as to the validity of the “Kasulatan” because:
- The petition for certiorari and prohibition before the Supreme Court
- On August 5, 1971, Demetrio Manalo filed the instant petition for certiorari and prohibition.
- The Supreme Court was asked to resolve whether the action for annulment in Civil Case No. 13708 was barred by res judicata.
- The Court held that the decision in the land registration proceeding barred the later annulment action.
- Contents of the challenged land registration findings on fraud and prescription (as stated in the decision)
- Branch VIII’s decision (as quoted in footnote) stated that:
Issues:
- Res judicata and effect of the land registration judgment
- Whether the annulment action in Civil Case No. 13708 was barred by res judicata due to the final judgment in Land Registration Case No. N-6347.
- Whether the land registration decision, considered a proceeding in rem, was conclusive upon the title and binding on the whole world.
- Whether the elements of res judicata were present between the land registration case and Civil Case No. 13708 with respect to Lots 1, 2 and 3, Plan Psu-191273.
- Whether it mattered that the children of Severino Manalo were plaintiffs in Civil Case No. 13708 and were not parties in Land Registration Case No. N-6347.
- Jurisdiction and procedural submission of the issue to the land registration court
- Whether Branch VIII lacked jurisdiction, as a land registration court with limited jurisdiction, to pass upon the v...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)