G.R. No. L-26752 March 19, 1971
PATERNO SANTOS, ET AL., petitioners, LEONILA POLICARPIO, petitioner-appellant, vs. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MANILA and PABLO LUCAS, respondents-appellees.

FACTS

The case originated from an extrajudicial foreclosure of a mortgage. Natividad Sanchez and Pablo Lucas purchased a property, assuming an existing mortgage with Monte de Piedad and Savings Bank. Due to a violation of the mortgage terms, the bank foreclosed, and Leonila Policarpio emerged as the highest bidder at the auction sale on September 2, 1963. The Sheriff’s Certificate of Sale was presented for registration the same day but was withdrawn due to defects. It was only successfully registered on August 26, 1964. Policarpio later assigned her rights to Paterno Santos, who registered the assignment on July 19, 1965.
On August 17, 1965, mortgagor Pablo Lucas redeemed the property by paying the required amount to the sheriff, who issued a certificate of redemption. This certificate was presented for registration but was withheld pending submission of the owner’s duplicate certificate of title. Meanwhile, unaware of the redemption, the bank executed a deed of absolute sale in favor of Policarpio on September 6, 1965, who then confirmed her prior assignment to Santos. Santos’s affidavit of consolidation and the deed of confirmation were annotated on the title on September 10, 1965. A conflict arose between the pending certificate of redemption and the later annotations.

ISSUE

The core issue is from which date the one-year redemption period for an extrajudicial foreclosure sale should be computed: from the date of the auction sale itself or from the date of registration of the sheriff’s certificate of sale.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the resolution of the Land Registration Commissioner, ruling that the redemption period begins to run from the date of registration of the sheriff’s certificate of sale, not from the date of the auction sale. The Court’s legal logic is anchored on the public notice function of the registration system under the Land Registration Act. Registration is not merely for the benefit of the immediate parties to the sale but is primarily intended to protect innocent third persons and provide constructive notice to all possible redemptioners. These redemptioners include the mortgagor’s successors-in-interest, judicial creditors, or any person having a subsequent lien on the property.
The Court cited a consistent line of jurisprudence, initially established for execution sales and later applied to foreclosure cases, which holds that the “date of sale” referenced in the redemption law (Act No. 3135, as amended) must be construed as the date of registration. Without registration, there is no effective constructive notice to the world of the change in the property’s status. Therefore, the one-year period for Pablo Lucas to redeem commenced on August 26, 1964. His redemption on August 17, 1965, was well within the statutory period. Consequently, his certificate of redemption rightly prevails over the subsequent deed of confirmation and affidavit of consolidation executed by Paterno Santos. The Register of Deeds was correct in giving preference to registering the certificate of redemption.