G.R. No. 26498, March 2, 1927
C.N. HODGES, plaintiff-appellant, vs. THE TREASURER OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

C.N. Hodges sought to recover P10,000 from the assurance fund as indemnity for damages allegedly suffered due to the negligence of the Register of Deeds of Occidental Negros. Hodges claimed the Register failed to timely record a mortgage deed he had sent for notation. The mortgage deed, executed by Ramon Siocon in favor of Hodges on September 6, 1920, covered a parcel of land previously sold to Siocon. Hodges mailed the deed and related documents to the Register of Deeds on September 10, 1920, but did not include the required registration fees, internal revenue stamp, and a certified copy of the certificate of title. The Register of Deeds entered the deed in his day book on November 24, 1920, but ultimately returned it unrecorded on October 13, 1921, due to the missing certified copy of the title. In the interim, another mortgage on the same property in favor of Lichauco & Co. was recorded on September 6, 1921. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, ruling that the action for damages to rural property should have been filed in Occidental Negros where the land is situated.

ISSUE

1. Whether the Court of First Instance of Iloilo had jurisdiction over the action for recovery of damages from the assurance fund.
2. Whether Hodges was entitled to indemnity from the assurance fund for the alleged negligence of the Register of Deeds.

RULING

1. Yes, the Court of First Instance of Iloilo had jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the action was not for damages to the real property itself, but for personal damages suffered by the mortgagee (Hodges) due to the alleged omission of a public official. Under Section 101 of the Land Registration Act (Act No. 496), actions against the Treasurer for recovery from the assurance fund may be brought in any court of competent jurisdiction. Applying the Code of Civil Procedure, since the action was not one for damages to real property (which would require venue where the land lies), the plaintiff could elect to file it in the province where he or the defendant resides. Hodges, a resident of Iloilo, validly exercised this option. Therefore, the trial court erred in dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction.

2. No, Hodges was not entitled to indemnity from the assurance fund. The Supreme Court ruled that Hodges’ own negligence barred his recovery. Section 61 of the Land Registration Act required the presentation of the owner’s duplicate certificate of title, payment of fees, and other prerequisites for registration. Hodges failed to send the required certified copy of the title and the registration fees with the mortgage deed. Under Section 101 of the same Act, indemnity from the assurance fund is only available to a party who suffers loss “without negligence on his part.” Since Hodges’ failure to comply with the statutory requirements prevented the Register of Deeds from recording the mortgage, any loss he suffered was due to his own negligence, not that of the Register.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
The appealed judgment is reversed. However, instead of remanding the case, the Supreme Court dismissed it on the merits, absolving the defendant-appellee from the complaint. No costs were awarded.