JUDGMENT AND DECREE

A judgment or decision constitutes the opinion of the court after taking

into consideration the evidence submitted by the parties in a controversy.
The Court, in land registration proceedings may either:
1. order the confirmation of confirmation and registration of title in
the name of the applicant it finds that the applicant has title sufficient for
registration; or
2. dismiss the application if the applicant fails to adduce evidence of
ownership over the subject property.

The decision of the trial court in land registration proceedings,

ordering the issuance of a decree, is not in itself a decree of registration
within the meaning of Section 38 of the LRA.

What are the actions that may be taken by the court after hearing
the evidence presented by the parties in registration proceedings?

(a) The court adjudicates ownership in favor of a claimant and

declares the decree final upon the expiration of 15 days (not 30 days) to be
counted from the date of receipt of notice of the judgment.
(b) Once the judgment becomes final and executory, i.e. no appeal is
taken from the judgment, it shall devolve upon the court to issue an order
to the Land Registration Authority to issue the corresponding decree of
registration and the corresponding certificate of title in favor of the person
adjudged entitled to registration.
(c) The third action devolves on the LRA where the agency prepares
and issues the final decree of registration containing the technical
description of the land and fixes a period of one year from entry of such
decree for a person deprived to file for a petition review. (PD 1529 Section
38)

Does the Court lose jurisdiction of the land registration case

after the issuance of the decree of registration?
 While the judgment of the court becomes final fifteen days from the
receipt of notice of judgment, the court retains jurisdiction over the case
until after the expiration of one (1) year from the issuance of the final
decree of registration. The decree of registration becomes final only after
one year from its issuance.
The issuance of a final decree is a judicial one not administrative
though issued by LRA, because the LR Adminstrator acts as an officer of
the court when he issues a decree and not as an administrative officer.

What is the effect of the finality of the decree of registration?

The decree of registration once final shall bind the land and quiet title
thereto subejct only to exceptions or liens as may be provided by law.It
shall be conclusive upon and against all persons, including the national
government and all its branches thereof, whether mentioned by name in
the application or notice, the same included in the general description, “To
all whom it may concern.” (PD 1529 Section 32)

Can the decree of registration be opened after its finality or after

the lapse of one yerar from its issuance?

A decree once final is deemed conclusive not only on questions

actually contested but also upon all matters that might be litigated and
decided in land registration proceeding. It is no longer open to question on
its legality and validity of the basis for which the land was confirmed.

What are the reasons why a decree of registration cannotb be

opened after its finality?

1. A decree once final cannot be re-opened because the very

purpose of the Torrens system would be destroyed if the same land may be
subsequently brought under a second action. A decree once final
becomes indefeasible, incontrovertible and imprescriptible. Hence, the
court has no jurisdiction to decree again the registration of land already
decreed in a previous proceeding.
 2. There will be no end to litigation if every obstinate litigant c o u l d ,
by repeated appeals or actions compel a court to listen to every criticisms.
Title to land thus determined is a res judicata and binding on the whole
world, being a proceeding in rem.

Is a motion for a writ of possession needed to enforce a

judgment in land registration proceedings?

No, unlike oridnary civil actions, land registration is a special

proceeding, the purpose of which is to establish a fact, status and a
condition. In LR proceedings the ownership of a person over land is sought
to be established . After the ownership has been proved and confirmed by
judicial declaration, no further proceeding to enforce said ownership is
necessary. Except when the adverse party is in possession of the land and
the losing party desires to oust him therefrom.
In LR proceedings, the issuance of a writ of execution is a ministerial
duty of the court and the prevailing party is entitled to it as a matter of right.

In LR proceedings, against whom may the writ lie?

A wirt of possession lie against the following:

1. Persons who appeared at the proceeding and answered the
application.
2. Persons who were served with process, but did not appear/
answer the application.
3. Anyone adversely occupying the land or any portion thereof during
the registration proceedings up to the issuance of the final decree.

Can a writ of possession be availed of against a third party who

entered and occupied the property after the issuance of the decree of
registration?

No, the registered owner or his successors-in-interest cannot

disposses such persons by merely asking for writ of possession.
Persons who took possession of the property after final adjudiation cannot
be summarily outsted through a writ of possession secured by motion.
They have to be given a day in court through any of the separate civil
actions i.e.:
1. unlawful detainer which seeks to recover possession only to be
brought within one year from the act of dispossession;
2. accion publiciana or reinvindicatory action the recovery of right to
possess to be filed before the RTC;
3. accion reivindicatoria which seeks to recover ownership and
possession.

What are the available remedies to question the validity of

judgment in registration cases?

1. New trial
A new trial is similar to mortion for reconsideration and must be filed
within fifteen days from receipt of of judgment. The court will act on the
motion where the case has not passed to the appellate court.

Grounds:
1. Fraud. Accident, mistake, excusable negligence which ordinary
prudence could have guarded against and by reason of which
such aggrieved party has probably been impaired of his rights.
2. newly discovered evidence which could not, with the exercise of
reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial
and which if presented would probably alter the result;
3. evidence was insufficient to justify the decision, or the decision is
against the law.
When the court acts upon a new trial, the court may:
1. grant new trial upon such terms as may be just, or
2. deny the motion

If the court grants a new trial, the original judgment shall be vacated
and the action shall stand for trial. Recorded evidence shall be used so far
as material and competent to establish the issues without retaking of the
same
 2. Appeal

Appeal may be take by filing notice of appeal with the court that
rendered judgment within 15 days from receipt of judgment by counsel of
aggrieved party. With respect to the government, which is invariably an
oppositor in ordinary registration proceedings, the notice of judgment that
binds it is the one sent to and received by the Solicitor General, not that of
the fiscal. Thus it is from that date of notice to the solgen that that the 15-
day period to appeal should be reckoned.

3. Review of Decree of Registration

The remedy is available to the aggrieved party who has been

deprived of land or any estate or interest therein by decree of registration:
with the court that issued the decree
The only ground to avail of the remedy of review is actual and
extrinsic fraud proved as of the time of judicial action, not subsequent
thereto, within one year after the date of the entry of the decree provided
no innocent purchaser for value as acquired an interest therein meaning
the aggrieved party must not only have an estate or interest in the land but
also show actual fraud in the procurement of the decree.

What are the conditions for justifying a review of judgment?

The grounds for review of judgment are the following:

1. the plaintiff is he owner of the land ordered registered in the name
of defendant;
2.the registration in the name of another was procured through
extrinsic/actual fraud;
3.the property has not been transferred to an innocent purchaser for
value;
4.the action is filed within one year from the issuance of the decree of
registration.

The case of Fausta Francisco vs. CA, GR No. L-35787, April 11, 1980
clearly illustrates actual or extrinsic fraud. In this case, It was clearly
established that petitioner Fausta Francisco, as adjacent owner of the land
in question was not notified of the alleged survey conducted over the land.
Respondents did not state the true adjoining owners with the deliberate
intention of preventing notices of their application for registration to be sent
to petitioner, Fausta Francisco and in that way prevent petitioner from
appearing in the land registration case and file an opposition to their
application. Francisco was denied her opportunity to be heard and the
proper remedy was review of the decree.

The petitioner need not be a party or an oppositor in the registration

proceeding or an original claimant who had filed an answer because as the
Court explained fraud might intervene precisely to prevent a person from
filing an answer.

What are the other grounds for justifying review of the decree?

1. fatal infirmity in the decision (provided no innocent purchaser for

value)
2. lack of jurisdiction (land decreed to private individual is part of
the public domain)
3. the Solicitor General was not furnished a copy of the decision.

Is the remedy of review or re-opening the decree an exclusive

remedy?
No, this is not an as exclusive remedy as the aggrieved party may
avail of reconveyance or recovery of the land (as long as the lnd has not
passed to an innocent third person in good faith) and damages.

Can a party resort to review of judgment if the land was

mistakenly decreed to another person?

No, because the only ground to avail of the remedy of review is acutal
or extrinsic fraud. The available remedy in case of mistake is
reconveyance or/and damages.

If the period of one year from the issuance of the decree has lapsed,
how can the rightful owner recover his land?
 4. Relief from Judgment

Relief from judgment is filed within 60 days after petitioner learns of

the judgment and not later that six months from the entry of judgment (date
of finality of judgment is date of entry) or order and before the issuance of
the decree or registration on the ground of .fraud, accident, mistake,
excusable negligence.

When does the remedy apply?

The remedy applies only when:
1. the one deprieved oh his right is a party to the case. it is an
exclusive remedy therefore, cannot be availed of when a motion for
new trial has been filed.
2. only when judgment has become final and a new trial is not
available.

5. Reconveyance

Reconveyance is the rightful and equitable remedy available to the

rightful owner whose property was erroneously or wrongfully registered to
another for the purpose of compelling the latter to reconvey the property to
him. The property is deemed to be held in trust for the real owner by the
person in whose name the property was registered. This is the remedy
available to the landowner after one year from the issuance of the
decree of registration or after the decree has become final.

Who can maintain the action for reconveyance?

The action for reconveyance can only be maintained by the
landowner who has been prejudiced by the wrongful registration of his
property in the name of another.

Is the remedy of reconveyance always available to the

landowner?
 1. The remedy of reconveyance cannot be availed of if the property
has passed to an innocent purchaser for value.
2. The action has not prescribed

What is the prescriptive period within which to file for an action

for reconveyance?
1. An action based on implied/constructive trust is 10 years from the
issuance of the certificate of title.
2. An action based on void contract is imprescriptible.
3. If the person claiming to be the owner is in possession of the
property, the right to seek reconveyance is in effect a right to quiet title
which does not prescribe.

Does the one year period from the opening of the decree or
review of judgment apply to action for reconveyance?
No, an action for reconveyance or damages, instituted after the
expiration of one year has not prescribed because it is not one
for the re-opening of the decree. The law affords various remedies to
persons who have been deprived of land by virtue of the operation of the
Torren’s system.

Is the remedy of reconveyance and exclusive remedy?

No, it is not an exclusive remedy. A person who seeks to recover his
property may also ask for damages suffered for the wrongful registration of
his property to another.

6. Recovery of damages

An action for damages is available when the remedy for an

action for conveyance is no longer available because the land has
passed to an innocent purchaser for value.

What are the requisites for claiming damages?

The claimant must establish the following:

 1. The rightful is in reality wrongfully deprived of his land by
the wrongful registration in the name of another, by actual or
constructive fraud.
2. There is no negligence on his part
3. The rightful owner or in anywary precluded from bringng an
an action for recovery.
4. The action has not prescribed

Who are liable for damages?

The person person who caused the damage should be held
liable.

*but if nothing can be recovered, the government has

provided for compensation to answer for such damages in favor of
any person, who without negligence on his part, sustains loss or
damage, by reason of operation of the system.

What are the requisites

Recovery of damages may be availed of when reconveyance can no

longer be availed of. An example is when the property was already
transferred to an innocent purchaser for value, the rightful owner can
no longer recover the property but can demand damages against the
person who caused the wrongful registration of the property.

7. Action for compensation from the Assurance Fund

*may be availed of in case of insolvency of the party who
procured the wrongful registration. This action is civil in character
and may be in the form of ordinary complaint for damage