GR L 4116; (June, 1952) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-4116 June 30, 1952
Graciano De Los Reyes and Precedes De Los Reyes, petitioners-appellees, vs. Hilario De Los Reyes, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
In Land Registration Case No. 8162, the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan confirmed the title to four parcels of land and decreed their registration in the names of Graciano De Los Reyes and his sister Precedes De Los Reyes. Original Certificate of Title No. 36580 was issued to them. Hilario De Los Reyes, the uncle of the registered owners, retained possession of the owner’s duplicate certificate of title and had been in possession of the lands since 1929. This was because Graciano left town at age 17, resided in Camarines Sur for 15 years, and only returned in 1943. Upon his return, Graciano demanded the surrender of the owner’s duplicate certificate, but Hilario refused. Graciano filed a sworn petition in the land registration case, praying that Hilario be directed to deliver the owner’s duplicate certificate. Hilario opposed, claiming an adverse right or interest. He alleged that the possession of a parcel of land was given to him by Graciano’s mother and stepfather to secure payment of a P320 loan, plus an additional P200 loan. He further claimed this amount increased to P1,086.05 due to his payments of P266.05 for survey and registration costs and P300 for legal expenses in defending the land against a claim by Ana Villegas. The court held Hilario’s adverse claim invalid and ordered its cancellation, directing the delivery of the owner’s duplicate certificate to Graciano. Hilario appealed.
ISSUE
Whether the adverse claim of Hilario De Los Reyes, which arose prior to the issuance of the original certificate of title, can be registered or entitle him to retain possession of the owner’s duplicate certificate of title.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the lower court. It held that Hilario’s claim, being prior to and not subsequent to the date of the original registration (the loan was made in 1924, and the title was issued in 1930), cannot be entered upon the Torrens certificate of title pursuant to Section 110 of the Land Registration Act. Such a claim does not entitle him to retain the owner’s duplicate certificate of title. If Hilario has a valid claim, he should bring a separate action to enforce it. The order directing the delivery of the certificate to Graciano and the cancellation of the adverse claim was affirmed.