Geñorga v. Meliton
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Julian Meliton and respondents were registered owners of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 8027. Julian sold portions of the land to various persons, including petitioner's husband, who took possession and introduced improvements. Julian failed to surrender the owner's duplicate copy of TCT No. 8027 to enable registration of the sales. Procedural History: A petition for surrender of the owner's duplicate copy and/or annulment thereof was filed. The RTC ordered the surrender of the title, and upon failure, declared TCT No. 8027 null and void and ordered the issuance of a new title. The new owner's duplicate copy was given to petitioner in 2009. Respondents filed a complaint for the surrender of the title, which the RTC granted, ordering petitioner and/or the Register of Deeds of Naga City (RD-Naga) to surrender the title. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC ruling. The Petition: Petitioner assails the CA Decision affirming the RTC ruling directing the surrender of the owner's duplicate copy of TCT No. 8027 to respondents.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the trial court's Decision directing the surrender and delivery of possession of the subject owner's duplicate title to respondents. Whether petitioner has a preferential right to the possession of the subject owner's duplicate title.
Ruling
The petition is denied. The Decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the Regional Trial Court's Decision directing the surrender and delivery of possession of the owner's duplicate copy of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 8027 to respondents is affirmed. Petitioner Remedios V. Geñorga or the Register of Deeds of Naga City is directed to deliver or surrender the owner's duplicate copy of TCT No. 8027 to respondents within sixty (60) days from notice.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether the CA correctly affirmed the trial court's Decision directing the surrender and delivery of possession of the subject owner's duplicate title to respondents: The Court ruled in the affirmative. The subject land was an undivided co-owned property, but the sales of definite portions and the buyers' possession and improvements indicated a partial factual partition. Section 58 of PD 1529 outlines the procedure for registering deeds involving portions of land, requiring the presentation of the owner's duplicate title. While the buyers' rights were recognized by a prior RTC Decision, there was no showing that all buyers had complied with the necessary registration requirements. A considerable amount of time had passed since petitioner received the title in 2009 until its submission to the RD-Naga in 2013, and even up to the filing of the petition, petitioner failed to provide sufficient justification for the continued delay in registration. The Court found no reversible error in the CA's affirmation of the RTC Decision. On the issue of whether petitioner has a preferential right to the possession of the subject owner's duplicate title: The Court ruled in the negative. The Court emphasized that the function of the Register of Deeds is ministerial. The RD-Naga cannot be expected to retain possession of the owner's duplicate title longer than what is reasonable to perform its duty. In the absence of a verified and approved subdivision plan and technical description duly submitted for registration, the title must be returned to the presenter. Petitioner failed to establish a better right to the possession of the owner's duplicate title as against respondents, who undisputedly own the bigger portion of the subject land. The Court clarified that this surrender is without prejudice to the rights of buyers who subsequently complete the necessary registration requirements and duly request the surrender of the title anew.
Main Doctrine
The Register of Deeds' function in registering deeds is ministerial. The owner's duplicate title must be surrendered to the registered owners when the buyers fail to comply with registration requirements within a reasonable time, without prejudice to their right to re-request surrender upon completion of said requirements.