Rodriguez v. Llorente
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Julian Moreno was entitled to a conveyance of a portion of land under transfer certificate of title No. 8164, pursuant to a contract with Juan Cruz Sanchez. Moreno applied to the Court of First Instance for an order segregating his portion. An order was issued on March 31, 1925, directing the register of deeds to issue a new certificate of title to Moreno for his portion, with Moreno to bear segregation expenses. Procedural History: The register of deeds received the order on March 31, 1925. Due to pending approval of plans by the General Land Registration Office, the new certificate could not be immediately issued. The plans were approved on October 5, 1925. Meanwhile, on June 9, 1925, Manuel Rodriguez (petitioner) filed a deed of conveyance from Juan Cruz Sanchez for the entire land covered by certificate No. 8164. Consequently, transfer certificate of title No. 9392 was issued to Rodriguez. However, due to a clerk's negligence, no memorandum of the March 31, 1925 order was entered on Rodriguez's certificate. The Petition: Rodriguez claimed he was not notified of a hearing on November 19, 1925, regarding the sale to Moreno. He had surrendered his certificate of title to the register of deeds for a lis pendens entry and only learned of the partial cancellation and issuance of Moreno's certificate upon its return. The respondent judge subsequently ordered the annulment of Rodriguez's certificate No. 9392 concerning the portion claimed by Moreno, and a new certificate (No. 10006) was issued to Moreno. Rodriguez filed a petition for a writ of certiorari.
Issue(s)
Whether the respondents' answer, to which the petitioner demurred, should be considered as admitting the truth of all material and relevant allegations therein. Whether the respondent judge acted within his jurisdiction in ordering the annulment of transfer certificate of title No. 9392 and the issuance of a new certificate in favor of Julian Moreno. Whether the petitioner, as a holder of transfer certificate of title No. 9392, is entitled to the protection of Section 39 of the Land Registration Act.
Ruling
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. The respondent judge acted within his jurisdiction. The petitioner is not entitled to the protection of Section 39 of the Land Registration Act.
Ratio Decidendi
On the effect of a motion for judgment on the pleadings: The Court reiterated the rule from Bauermann vs. Casas that a party moving for judgment on the pleadings without offering proof admits the truth of all material and relevant allegations of the opposing party. In this case, the respondents' answer, setting forth their version of the facts, was deemed admitted by the petitioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings after withdrawing his demurrer. On the jurisdiction of the respondent judge: The Court found that the respondent judge acted within his jurisdiction under Section 112 of the Land Registration Act. This section empowers the court to order the cancellation or amendment of certificates of title for cause shown. The judge's order directing the annulment of Rodriguez's title concerning Moreno's portion and the issuance of a new title to Moreno was a proper exercise of this authority, especially given the circumstances of the title's issuance. On the petitioner's entitlement to protection: The Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to the protection of Section 39 of the Land Registration Act. Section 55 of the Act mandates the presentation of the owner's duplicate certificate for the issuance of a new certificate or memorandum, except in cases expressly provided or upon court order. The petitioner admitted that his certificate was issued without presenting the owner's duplicate certificate of his vendor, Juan Cruz Sanchez, or a court order authorizing its issuance. Therefore, the certificate was issued illegally and without authority, rendering the petitioner unable to claim good faith and placing him in the shoes of his vendor, subject to the prior order in favor of Moreno.
Main Doctrine
A party seeking a writ of certiorari who moves for judgment on the pleadings admits the truth of all material and relevant allegations of the opposing party. A certificate of title issued without the presentation of the owner's duplicate certificate or a court order is void, and the recipient cannot claim protection as a holder in good faith.