Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5623)
Facts:
- Petitioner is Manila Trading and Supply Co., a corporation that is the lessee of three parcels of land in the Port Area, Manila, owned by the Philippine Government.
- Petitioner previously recorded their lease on the Government's certificate of title No. 4938.
- After the structures built by the petitioner were destroyed during the war, they erected new buildings that cost over a million pesos.
- On April 2, 1951, petitioner requested the Manila Court of First Instance to require the register of deeds to enter and annotate their declaration of property ownership on certificate of title No. 4938.
- The register of deeds demanded payment of P1,308 for the assurance fund, as required by section 99 of the Land Registration Act.
- Petitioner argued that section 99 is inapplicable because the matter does not involve the original registration of "land" or the entry of a certificate showing title as registered owners in heirs or devisees.
- Petitioner contended that "buildings" and "improvements" are not considered "land" under the Act.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The court ruled in favor of the register of deeds, affirming the order to...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The court reasoned that although buildings may not be registered separately and independentl...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5623)
Facts:
The case of Manila Trading & Supply Co. v. Register of Deeds of Manila involves the issue of whether the owner of buildings erected on leased premises is required to contribute to the assurance fund when petitioning for annotation of their ownership on the corresponding certificate of Torrens Title. The petitioner, Manila Trading & Supply Co., is the lessee of three parcels of land in the Port Area, Manila, owned by the Philippine Government. The company had previously recorded their lease on the Government's certificate of title. After the company's buildings were destroyed during the war, they constructed new buildings worth over a million pesos. They then requested the Manila Court of First Instance to annotate their ownership of the valuable improvements on the certificate of title. However, the register of deeds demanded payment of P1,308 for the assurance fund, as required by section 99 of Act No. 496. The company refused to pay and sought relief from the court. The court upheld the register of deeds' demand, leading to this appeal.
Issue:
The main issue in this case is whether the provision of section 99 of Act No. 496, which r...