Republic vs.

Lee
Facts:

Petitioner contends that respondent failed to prove by conclusive evidence that she has ownership
of the land by fee simple title and her testimony as to the ownership of her predecessor-in-interest is
self serving. Private respondent, on the other hand, contends that she was able to prove her title to
the land in question through documentary evidence consisting of Deeds of Sale and tax declarations
and receipts as well as her testimony that her predecessors-in-interest had been in possession of
the land in question for more than 20 years.

Ruling:

In is held that it is incumbent upon the respondent to prove that her predecessor-in-interest have
been in adverse, continuous, open, public, peaceful possession in the concept of an owner for 20
years which she failed to provide a well-nigh incontrovertible proof evidence required incases ofthis
nature.

Hernandez vs. Katigbak GR No. L-46840 ; June 17, 1940

Facts: Vicente
Singson Encarnacion was at first alone, and later with others, the registered owner of lots Nos. 27, 28 and
29 if the Hacienda Maysilo located in Tuliahan, Caloocan, Rizal with an aggregate area of 234 hectares.
Nicolas Rivera then repurchased the 40 hectares of the three lots and later sold to Mariano P. Leuterio an
unsegregated portion of about 18 hectares. The latter, in turn, sold a total area od 16, 900 square meters
to Rafael Villanueva by deeds which have never been registered. Later, Villanueva sold to Victoriano
Hernandez all rights in the said total area of 16,900 square meters. In a civil case instituted by Perfecto
Salas Rodriguez against Marinao Leuterio, a writ of execution was issued against the defendant and in
pursuance thereof, the provincial sheriff levied upon the properties of said defendant to which among
them was the property that the defendant bought from Nicolas Rivera. Villanueva then filed a third party
claim but the sheriff proceeded with the execution and sold the property at a public auction at which
judgment creditor was the highest bidder. Prior to the execution of the officer s deed, the 40 hectares
bought by Rivera from Encarnacion was segregated and two transfer certificate titles were issued in
favour of Rivera. The execution lien of Rodriguez as well as the auction sale which were annotated on the
certificate title were transferred to and annotated on the new certificate of title; and there having been no
redemption, a final deed of sale was executed by the sheriff in favour of Rodriguez.

Issue: Who has a better right the purchaser at the execution sale, Perfecto J. Salas Roriguez,
predecessor in interest of the defendant, or the purchaser in the private sale, Rafael Villanueva,
predecessor in interest of plaintiff?

Held: The court ruled that the two purchasers derived their title from Leuterio, who in turn acquired his
from Rivera. The purchase made by Villanueva took place prior to the execution sale but was never
registered and that no certificate of title was ever issued in favour of Leuterio but the levy and the
execution sale were noted on the certificate of title of Rivera without the latter s objection. It was
therefore, Mariano P. Leuterio alone who, in Rivera s certificate of title, appeared as the sole owner of
the property at the time of the levy and execution sale. It is a well settled rule that when the property sold
on execution is registered under the Torrens systems, registration is the operative act that gives validity to
the transfer, or creates a lien on the land, and a purchaser, on execution sale, is not required to go behind
the registry to determine the conditions of the property.