Register of Deeds of Manila v. Magdalena Estate
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On January 19, 1955, a notice of lis pendens was recorded in connection with Civil Case No. 25111, entitled Carlos Ysmael, et al. v. Magdalena Hashim, et al., which was filed in the Court of First Instance of Manila. The Register of Deeds of Manila, pursuant to Section 72 of the Land Registration Act, requested Magdalena Estate, Inc. (appellant) to submit its owner's duplicate copies of Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 5969 to 5978 for the annotation of the notice of lis pendens. Procedural History: Magdalena Estate, Inc. opposed the request, arguing that the complaint in Civil Case No. 25111 was a personal action, not a real action, and that the annotation would cause prejudice. The Register of Deeds reported the non-compliance to the Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch IV. The court, after hearing, ruled that the complaint was a real action and ordered the surrender of the owner's duplicate certificates for annotation. The court also held that Republic Act No. 1151 did not divest Branch IV of its jurisdiction over such matters. The Petition: Magdalena Estate, Inc. appealed the order, contending that Branch IV of the Court of First Instance lacked jurisdiction due to Republic Act No. 1151, that the notice of lis pendens was improper as the action was personal, and that the Register of Deeds and the court erred in ordering the annotation and surrender of the titles.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of First Instance (Branch IV) retained jurisdiction to compel the surrender of owner's duplicates under Section 72 of Act No. 496, or if such jurisdiction was transferred to the Land Registration Commission by Republic Act No. 1151. Whether the disagreement of a party in interest with the Register of Deeds necessitates a 'consulta' even if the Register of Deeds is not in doubt. Whether a notice of lis pendens is proper in an action for corporate accounting, dissolution, and liquidation where the assets involved include real property.
Ruling
The order appealed from is affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court ruled that Branch IV of the Court of First Instance of Manila retains jurisdiction to act on reports from the Register of Deeds under Section 72 of the Land Registration Act. While Republic Act No. 1151 transferred administrative functions and 'consulta' powers under Section 200 of the Administrative Code to the Land Registration Commission (LRC), it did not repeal Section 72 of Act No. 496. Section 72 specifically empowers the court to enter an order to the owner to produce their certificate and to enforce said order by suitable process. The Court emphasized that the repealing clause of Republic Act No. 1151 only covers laws inconsistent with it, and Section 72 is not inconsistent with the administrative powers of the LRC. Therefore, the CFI is the proper body to exercise the judicial power of compelling the surrender of documents. On Issue 2: The Court rejected the appellant's contention that a 'consulta' is mandatory whenever a party disagrees with the Register of Deeds. A closer analysis of Section 4 of Republic Act No. 1151 reveals that the essential element for a 'consulta' is the doubt on the part of the Register of Deeds as to the proper step to be taken. The expression 'or where any party in interest does not agree' is not an independent requisite but refers to a disagreement arising from the existing doubt of the Register of Deeds which has prevented the act of registration. Since the Register of Deeds in this case did not entertain any doubt and had already annotated the originals, there was no occasion for a 'consulta.' On Issue 3: The Court held that the notice of lis pendens was proper because the underlying complaint involved a real action. Although the prayer included accounting and dissolution, the plaintiffs specifically sought a declaration of a 25% interest in all assets of the corporation, which included the lands covered by the subject titles. Under Section 24, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court, a notice of lis pendens is appropriate in actions affecting the title or the right of possession of real property. Since the litigation involves the determination of ownership interests in specific lands, it satisfies the requirements for the annotation of lis pendens to protect the rights of the litigants pending the final outcome of the accounting and liquidation.
Main Doctrine
A notice of lis pendens is proper in an action that involves a real action, even if it also seeks accounting, dissolution, and liquidation, as these are corollaries to the main action. The jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance to order the surrender of owner's duplicate certificates for annotation of lis pendens remains, notwithstanding the transfer of 'consulta' functions to the Land Registration Commissioner under Republic Act No. 1151, as Section 72 of the Land Registration Act was not repealed.