G.R. No. L-5041
December 22, 1908
ALFONSO DEBRUNNER, plaintiff, vs. JOAQUIN JARAMILLO, defendant.

FACTS:
Doña Concepcion Perello, as administratrix, sold a tract of land to Alfonso Debrunner with a right of repurchase within two years. The deed stipulated that failure to pay P50 monthly rent for two consecutive months, or non-fulfillment of other obligations, would terminate the lease and deem the repurchase period expired. The vendor subsequently failed to pay rent, taxes, and insurance. Debrunner then obtained a default judgment from a justice of the peace on August 26, 1908, confirming the vendor’s default. Debrunner presented this judgment to Joaquin Jaramillo, the Registrar of Property for Manila, requesting him to enter a “note of consolidation” on the inscription of the deed, indicating the expiration of the right of repurchase. The Registrar refused, reasoning that the stipulated repurchase time had not expired, the rental contract was not the object of the original inscription, and a third party had recorded an attachment on the widow’s interest in the land. Debrunner, after an initial appeal to the Court of Land Registration, commenced this original action for mandamus.

ISSUE:
Can a writ of mandamus be issued to compel the Registrar of Property to enter a note of consolidation when such entry requires the Registrar to exercise judgment and discretion in determining the legal effect of documents and contracts, specifically whether a right of repurchase has expired?

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court sustained the demurrer, ruling that mandamus will not lie to compel the Registrar of Property to enter the note of consolidation.

The Court held that the duties of a Registrar of Property under the Mortgage Law (Articles 18, 100, and 101) are “to a large extent judicial,” involving the determination of the legality of documents and the capacity of parties under their responsibility. In this particular case, the Registrar was presented with several questions requiring the exercise of judgment: whether the express two-year repurchase period was modified by the subsequent acceleration clause, and whether the justice of the peace judgment was sufficient evidence to definitively prove non-payment of rent (which the Court noted was not conclusive against the vendor in future litigation). These tasks involve the Registrar’s judgment as to the legal effect of the acts and contracts of the parties, and thus are not merely ministerial duties.

Mandamus is a remedy applicable only to ministerial duties and cannot be used to control the discretion of an officer or compel them to perform an act requiring judgment. Furthermore, the vendor and the attaching creditor, who are the parties directly interested in the property, were not parties to this proceeding, and any judgment herein would not be binding upon them. The demurrer was sustained, and the plaintiff was given five days to amend the complaint.