G.R. No. L-40107 December 2, 1987
Gervacio D. Verceles, petitioner, vs. Hon. Angel P. Bacani, Presiding Judge of Branch IX of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, and Gregoria Ladines y Quintos, respondents.

FACTS

The case involves a dispute between an elderly grandmother, Gregoria Ladines, and her grandson, Gervacio Verceles. Gregoria is the registered owner under TCT No. 78685. In 1944, she and her husband donated a 1,064-square-meter portion of the land covered by that title to their son Dionisio (Gervacio’s father) through a deed of donation propter nuptias. The donation was only annotated as an adverse claim on the title in 1970. Gervacio, claiming inheritance from his deceased parents, possessed the owner’s duplicate certificate of title.
In 1974, Gregoria filed a petition in the trial court to compel Gervacio to surrender the owner’s duplicate copy to the Register of Deeds to enable her to register further documents. Gervacio opposed, arguing that Gregoria was no longer the absolute owner due to the donation and other conveyances, and that a separate civil case regarding ownership was pending. The trial court granted Gregoria’s petition, ordering Gervacio to surrender the title to the Register of Deeds.

ISSUE

Whether the respondent judge committed grave abuse of discretion in ordering the surrender of the owner’s duplicate certificate of title.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the respondent judge did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The legal logic is anchored on the principles of the Torrens system. TCT No. 78685 remains registered in the name of Gregoria Ladines. As the registered owner, she is entitled to the possession of the owner’s duplicate copy of the certificate of title. The petitioner’s claim, based on the annotated adverse claim stemming from the donation, does not divest the registered owner of her right to hold the physical title. The annotation on the title serves as sufficient protection for the petitioner’s alleged interest. Until the title is duly cancelled or altered in the registration process, the right to possess the owner’s duplicate copy pertains to the registered owner.
However, the Court modified the trial court’s order. The directive to surrender the title to the Register of Deeds was improper. The correct remedy is for the petitioner to deliver the owner’s duplicate copy directly to the registered owner, Gregoria Ladines, or her authorized representative. This ensures she can use it for legitimate registration purposes while the petitioner’s claimed interest remains annotated for protection. The petition was denied with modification.