G.R. No. L-5096
RAMON MORTERA, petitioner-appellee, vs. INOCENTE MARTINEZ, ET AL., opponents-appellants.
December 2, 1909

FACTS:
On August 23, 1907, Jose de Guzman filed a petition for the registration of a parcel of land. He acquired the property on May 23, 1907, from Inocente Martinez (represented by his attorney-in-fact, Francisco Godinez) through a deed of sale with pacto de retro for 40 days. This sale was duly recorded. When Martinez failed to repurchase the property within the stipulated period, ownership was confirmed to Guzman and also registered. Subsequently, on August 20, 2007, Guzman sold the land to Ramon Mortera, who then substituted Guzman as the petitioner for registration.

Inocente Martinez opposed the registration, arguing that his agent, Godinez, exceeded his authority by stipulating a 40-day redemption period, allegedly violating Article 1714 of the Civil Code and rendering the sale null and void. He also claimed the land was the subject of litigation (between him and the municipality of San Pablo) at the time of the sale, violating Article 1291, No. 4 of the Civil Code.

Exequiela Buñi also opposed, claiming Martinez had previously sold the same land to her with pacto de retro for six years in March 1904. This earlier sale to Buñi was unregistered.

A prior judgment by the Court of First Instance on March 2, 1907, had already declared Martinez as the owner of the land, absolving him from the municipality’s complaint. The majority of the judges of the Court of Land Registration granted the registration in favor of Mortera.

ISSUE:
1. Whether the agent, Francisco Godinez, exceeded his authority in executing the pacto de retro sale, thereby rendering it null and void.
2. Whether the sale was void because the land was allegedly subject to litigation.
3. Whether Act No. 1108 repealed the provisions of the Civil Code concerning sales with pacto de retro.
4. Whether an unregistered pacto de retro sale can defeat a subsequent registered title.
5. Whether Ramon Mortera’s dominion over the land should be registered.

RULING:
The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the decision of the Court of Land Registration, thereby upholding the registration of the land in favor of Ramon Mortera.

1. The Court implicitly held that the agent did not exceed his authority. The pacto de retro sale to Guzman was valid and became consummated upon the expiration of the redemption period without repurchase. The notarial documents executed by the contracting parties and the entries in the registry were authentic, duly executed, and unimpugned.
2. The argument that the land was subject to litigation at the time of sale was found without merit, as a prior CFI judgment (March 2, 1907) had already declared Martinez as the owner, absolving him from the municipality’s complaint, thus the land was not truly in litigation in the sense that would invalidate the sale under Art. 1291, No. 4.
3. Act No. 1108 did not repeal or abolish the contract of sale with pacto de retro or the relevant articles of the Civil Code. These contracts retain their real character and are distinct from mortgages. Act No. 1108 merely amplified the provisions for their registration.
4. Exequiela Buñi’s unregistered pacto de retro sale could not prevent the registration of Mortera’s title. An unregistered document cannot, under the law, defeat a duly registered title, especially when the latter’s ownership has been consummated and also registered. The land was satisfactorily proven to be the absolute property of Mortera.
5. Mortera’s dominion over the land, acquired through valid and registered transactions following a consummated pacto de retro sale, was absolute and therefore registrable in accordance with the law.