G.R. No. L-47282 November 23, 1983
CONSTANCIO ABAPO, petitioner, vs. HON. JUAN Y. REYES, Presiding Judge of Branch 1, Court of First Instance of Cebu, The Honorable LAND REGISTRATION COMMISSIONER, ANTONIO A. ZOSA and JOVENCIO ABAPO, respondents.

FACTS

Catalina Gabuya and others filed a petition for reconstitution of a lost certificate of title or, alternatively, an application for registration of Lot No. 4673 of the Cebu Cadastre. The petition was opposed by Constancio Abapo, Jovencio Abapo, and the Republic. Antonio A. Zosa intervened. After hearing, the lower court dismissed the petition in its August 24, 1973 decision. It found that the Land Registration Commission certified Decree No. 687556 was issued for the lot in November 1938. The court held that this decree, having become final, brought the land under the Torrens system, and the principle of res judicata barred readjudication. It thus directed the Commissioner to reconstruct the decree and the Register of Deeds to issue the corresponding original certificate of title.
Subsequently, respondent Zosa filed a motion for reconsideration/clarification. The lower court reversed itself in an order dated November 29, 1973, amending its decision to approve Zosa’s application for registration of specific sub-lots and confirming title to other portions in favor of Constancio and Jovencio Abapo. Petitioner Constancio Abapo’s appeal to the Court of Appeals was dismissed for failure to file a brief. When Zosa later moved for issuance of a decree and writ of possession, the Land Registration Commissioner reported it could not comply, as issuing a new decree for the already decreed Lot No. 4673 would result in a duplication of title.

ISSUE

Whether the lower court acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion in issuing its November 29, 1973 order that effectively granted a new registration application.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulled the November 29, 1973 order, and reinstated the August 24, 1973 decision. The legal logic is grounded on the conclusive and incontrovertible nature of a decree of registration. The lower court’s initial August 1973 decision correctly recognized that the Land Registration Commission’s certification of Decree No. 687556, issued in 1938 for Lot No. 4673, was binding. Under the Torrens system, such a decree, once final, becomes conclusive upon all persons and against the whole world. It operates as res judicata, vesting title and bringing the land under the operation of the land registration act.
Consequently, the court’s jurisdiction in the reconstitution case was limited solely to determining the propriety of reconstituting the lost title based on that existing decree. It had no authority to entertain a new or collateral application for original registration of the same land. By reversing its dismissal and proceeding to adjudicate titles anew in its November 1973 order, the lower court patently transcended its jurisdiction. It effectively reopened a already settled cadastral proceeding, which the law prohibits to ensure the finality and stability of Torrens titles. The proper remedy, as indicated in the original decision, was the reconstitution of the lost certificate based on the 1938 decree, with any conflicting claims to be resolved in a separate ordinary action.