You are on page 1of 2


No, the appeal is not meritorious.
The action to annul the sale was instituted in 1977 or more than (10) years from the date
of execution thereof in 1957, hence, it has long prescribed.
Under Sec 45 of Act 496, the entry of a certificate of title shall be regarded as an
agreement running with the land, and binding upon the applicant and all his successors in title
that the land shall be and always remain registered land. A title under Act 496 is indefeasible and
to preserve that character, the title is cleansed anew with every transfer for value
While there is the possibility that Farah, a former lessee of the land was aware of the fact
that Caloy was the bona fide occupant thereof and for this reason his transfer certificate of title
may be vulnerable, the transfer of the same land and the issuance of new TCTs to Xian and
Yvonne who are innocent purchasers for value render the latter's titles indefeasible. A person
dealing with registered land may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of title and the
law will not in any way oblige him to go behind the certificate to determine the condition of the
property in search for any hidden defect or inchoate right which may later invalidate or diminish
the right to the land. This is the mirror principle of the Torrens System of land registration.
Even if the government joins Caloy, this will not alter the outcome of the case so much
because of estoppel as an express provision in Sec 45 of Act 496 and Sec 31 of PD 1529 that a
decree of registration and the certificate of title issued in pursuance thereof shall be conclusive
upon and against all persons, including the national government and all branches thereof,
whether mentioned by name in the application or not.

No, the spouses Xavier and Yolanda cannot file an action for reconveyance of the land
against Bertha because the latter has acquired a clean title to the property being an innocent
purchaser for value.
A forged deed is an absolute nullity and conveys no title. The fact that the forged deed
was registered and a certificate of title was issued in his name did not operate to vest upon an
ownership over the property of Xavier and Yolanda. The registration of the forged deed will not
cure the infirmity. However, once the title to the land is registered in the name of the forger and
title to the land thereafter falls into the hands of an innocent purchaser for value, the latter
acquires a clean title thereto. A buyer of a registered land is not required to explore beyond what

the record in the registry indicates on its face in quest for any hidden defect or inchoate right
which may subsequently defeat his right thereto. This is the "mirror principle' of the Torrens
system which makes it possible for a forged deed to be the root of a good title.
When the spouses delivered this OCT to the mortgagee without annotating the mortgage
thereon, they become guilty of contributory negligence. Therefore, between them and the
innocent purchaser for value, they should bear the loss.
Yes, the suit filed by Peter is barred by prescription.
Under Article 173 of the Civil Code , the wife may, during the marriage, and within ten years
from the transaction questioned, ask the courts for the annulment of any contract of the husband
entered into without her consent.. In the case at bar, the action is barred by prescription because
the wife had only ten years from the transaction and during the marriage to file a suit for the
annulment of the mortgage deed.
The action to recover has been barred by acquisitive prescription in favor of Myra
considering that Myra has possessed the land under a claim of ownership for ten years with a just
If Myra applied for registration under the Torrens Title to the said property in question,
Simon and Peter could not still recover because their available remedies would only be:
1. A Petition to Review the Decree of Registration. This can be availed of within one year
from the entry thereof, but only upon the basis of "actual fraud." There is no showing that
Myra committed actual fraud in securing his title to the land; or
2. An action in personam against Myra for the reconveyance of the title in their favor.
Again, this remedy is available within four years from the date of the discovery of the
fraud but not later than ten years from the date of registration of the title in the name of