G.R. No. 156310; July 31, 2008
XERXES A. ABADIANO, Petitioner, vs. SPOUSES JESUS and LOLITA MARTIR, Respondents.

FACTS

The case involves a dispute over ownership of portions of Lot No. 1318. The lot was originally covered by OCT No. 20461 in the name of spouses Bañares and Villanueva. In 1922, an Agreement of Partition divided the lot among their heirs, including Ramon and David Abadiano. In 1962, a court order led to the cancellation of the reconstituted OCT and the issuance of TCT No. T-31862 in the names of the heirs, including Ramon and David Abadiano. Petitioner Xerxes Abadiano, claiming descent from Ramon, asserts this TCT as the valid title and denies any prior sale of the Abadiano share.
Respondent spouses Martir claim ownership through a chain of title originating from a 1922 sale by Ramon Abadiano (acting for himself and David) to Victor Garde, evidenced by a notarized “Compra Y Venta.” The Garde heirs later sold to Jose Garde, who then sold to respondent Lolita Martir in 1979. The spouses were in possession until 1982 when Roberto Abadiano (son of Ramon) entered the land. Respondents filed an action to quiet title. The trial court ruled in favor of the spouses Martir, declaring them owners of the disputed portions, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the 1922 notarized Deed of Sale (Compra Y Venta) in favor of Victor Garde is valid and effectively conveyed the interests of Ramon and David Abadiano, thereby prevailing over the subsequently issued TCT No. T-31862 which still named the Abadianos as co-owners.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the lower courts’ decisions. The Court upheld the validity and efficacy of the 1922 notarized Deed of Sale. A notarized document carries the presumption of regularity and is a public document that conveys a constructive notice of its contents. The sale was further confirmed by David Abadiano in 1939. Consequently, when Ramon Abadiano sold the property in 1922, he already conveyed his and his brother David’s interests to Victor Garde. Therefore, by the time TCT No. T-31862 was issued in 1962, the Abadianos no longer had any interest to be registered. The Torrens title issued was thus flawed, as it covered property already alienated. The Court emphasized that registration does not vest title but merely confirms it; it cannot validate a claim founded on a void transaction. Since the respondents and their predecessors-in-interest had been in open, continuous, and notorious possession of the land since 1922, their ownership was firmly established, rendering the TCT in the name of the Abadianos ineffective against them. The action for quieting of title was proper to remove this cloud on the respondents’ ownership.