G.R. No. L-20075 November 27, 1968
DANAO COAL MINING SYNDICATE, LTD., applicant, SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY, petitioner-appellee, vs. CENON LAURENTE, oppositor-appellant.

FACTS

The case originated from the Court of First Instance of Cebu acting as a land registration court. Southwestern University purchased a parcel of land in Camansi, Danao, Cebu, from the heirs of the registered owner, H.M.H. Nemazee, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 7567. Annotated on the title were two incumbrances: (a) a condition requiring a minimum coal production from mining claims, with a royalty payable to the government for any deficiency, and (b) an agreement reserving the use and occupancy of the surface of the land in favor of several named individuals, including Filomeno del Mar. After acquiring the land via a quitclaim deed, Southwestern University filed an ex parte petition under Section 112 of Act No. 496 (Land Registration Act) seeking cancellation of these annotations, registration of the deed, and issuance of a new title. The lower court granted the petition without notice to interested parties, cancelling TCT No. 7567 and issuing TCT No. RT-2164 in Southwestern University’s name. Cenon Laurente, who was being sued by Southwestern University in an ejectment case concerning the land, filed a motion for reconsideration. He claimed a possible interest as a purchaser of a parcel from Filomeno del Mar (one of the persons named in the second annotation) and argued the cancellation should not have been ordered without notice to successors-in-interest like himself. Laurente’s alleged interest was never registered on the title. The lower court denied his motion, ruling that as a land registration court, it could only act on what appeared on the face of the title, and notice was not required for parties not annotated thereon, especially since the registered beneficiaries were deceased.

ISSUE

Whether the land registration court erred in granting the ex parte petition for cancellation of annotations without notice to Cenon Laurente, who claimed a possible unregistered interest as a successor-in-interest to one of the named beneficiaries.

RULING

No, the orders of the lower court are affirmed. The cancellation of registered interests that have terminated (here, the rights of use and occupancy which ceased upon the death of all named beneficiaries) is proper under Section 112 of Act No. 496 . Notice was unnecessary as there were no living parties in interest annotated on the title to notify. Cenon Laurente was not a party in interest entitled to notice. His claim was too vague and unsubstantial, as he merely alleged his interest “might be” affected. He failed to present a deed of conveyance or any public instrument evidencing his purchase from Filomeno del Mar, as required by Article 1280(1) of the Civil Code of 1889 for transactions affecting immovable property. Moreover, under the Torrens system, registration is the operative act that binds the land, and his unregistered claim could not affect the registered owner or its successors. His failure to annotate his claim or assert it for over twenty years, without adequate explanation, cast doubt on its genuineness and constituted laches. Therefore, the lower court correctly acted within its limited jurisdiction as a land registration court by relying solely on the face of the certificate of title.