G.R. No. 159595 . January 23, 2007.
Republic of the Philippines, Petitioner, vs. Lourdes Abiera Nillas, Respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Lourdes Abiera Nillas filed a Petition for Revival of Judgment concerning a 1941 cadastral court decision that adjudicated Lot No. 771 in favor of certain individuals, from whom Nillas derived her title. Despite the finality of the 1941 judgment, no decree of registration was ever issued for the lot. The Regional Trial Court granted the petition, ordering the revival of the judgment and the issuance of the corresponding decree. The Republic, through the Office of the Solicitor General, appealed, arguing that the action for revival had prescribed under the rules for ordinary civil actions and that laches had set in due to the long delay.

ISSUE

Whether prescription or laches can bar a petition to revive a judgment in a land registration case.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the lower courts’ rulings. The Court held that the rules on prescription and laches applicable to ordinary civil actions do not govern land registration proceedings, which are in rem and involve the status of property. A final judgment in a land registration case is not subject to the prescriptive periods found in Section 6, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court or Article 1144 of the Civil Code. Such a judgment, once final, becomes irrevocable and can no longer be altered; the prevailing party’s right to the issuance of a decree of title is imprescriptible. The duty to issue the decree is ministerial upon the Land Registration Authority. The Court distinguished the cases cited by the Republic, noting they involved ordinary civil actions or situations of double registration, not the ministerial execution of a final cadastral decree. The delay in seeking the decree, even if lengthy, does not extinguish the right founded on a final judgment.