Gaca, Shanon Cristy F.

236. AFP Mutual Benefit Association vs CA

PETITIONER: AFP MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATION, INC.

RESPONDENT: COURT OF APPEALS
DATE: March 3, 2000
PONENTE: Pardo, J.
TOPIC: Notice of Lis Pendens

FACTS:
 On September 7, 1976, Investco, as owners of six (6) parcels of land, agreed to sell it to Solid
Homes.
 The parties agreed that Solid Homes would evict the squatters in the property or obtain a waiver
from them, that it would cause the original titles to be cancelled and new ones issued in the name
of Investco and that the latter would contributed half of the expenses in clearing the property of
occupants.
 The contract of sale to Solid Homes was not registered nor annotated on the original titles
 Upon presentment of the checks issued by Solid Homes as payment, the same were dishonored,
thus, the filing by Investco of an action for specific performance and damages with the CFI of
Rizal
 Solid Homes filed its Answer alleging that the purchase price under the contract was not yet due
and that they overpaid
 On September 20, 1984, Solid Homes filed with the RD of Marikina a notice of lis pendens
requesting that the same be annotated on the titles in Investco’s name. However, the notice was
not actually annotated.
 CFI ruled in favor of Investco
 Investco then sold the property to AFP Mutual Benefit which the latter verified and found that the
copies of the title thereto were genuine and that there were no liens or encumbrances annotated
 Solid Homes commenced an action for “annotation of lis pendens and damages.” It prayed that
the RD be ordered to annotate on the titles the notice of lis pendens and to carry over the same
to the titles in the name of AFP
 RTC granted Solid Homes’ complaint
 On appeal by the AFP, CA ordered AFP to pay Solid Homes damages

ISSUE: Whether or not Solid Homes is entitled to the annotation of lis pendens of the titles of Investco
and AFP

RULING: NO
 Obviously, the Register of Deed's obligation to annotate the notice of lis pendens is one that
arises from law. Hence, the action is actually one for mandamus to compel the performance of a
clear legal duty. There is no such action as one for "annotation of lis pendens," as Solid Homes
sought in its complaint.
 Lis pendens is a Latin term which literally means a pending suit or a pending litigation while
a notice of lis pendens is an announcement to the whole world that a particular real property is in
litigation, serving as a warning that one who acquires an interest over the said property does so
at his own risk, or that he gambles on the result of the litigation over the said property. It is but a
signal to the intending buyer or mortgagee to take care or beware and to investigate the prospect
or non-prospect of the litigation succeeding before he forks down his money."
 A notice of lis pendens is not and cannot be sought as a principal action for relief. "The notice is
but an incident to an action, an extra-judicial one to be sure. It does not affect the merits thereof.
It is intended merely to constructively advise, or warn, all people who deal with the property that
they so deal with it at their own risk, and whatever rights they may acquire in the property in any
 voluntary transaction are subject to the results of the action, and may well be inferior and
subordinate to those which may be finally determined and laid down therein."
 The notice of lis pendens — that real property is involved in an action — is ordinarily recorded
without the intervention of the court where the action is pending. 23 As a settled rule, notice of lis
pendens may be annotated only where there is an action or proceeding in court which affects title
to or possession of real property. 24
 Here, the Register of Deeds of Marikina denied the annotation of the notice of  lis pendens on the
ground that the complaint in Civil Case No. 40615 was for collection of a sum of money and did
not involve the titles to or possession of the subject property. If Solid Homes did not agree with
the denial of the Register of Deeds, it could appeal the same en consulta to the Commissioner of
Land Registration. The resolution of the Commissioner may then be appealed to the Court of
Appeals, which has exclusive jurisdiction to decide the same, "within the period and in the
manner provided in Republic Act No. 5434." 

DISPOSITION: Petition GRANTED. CA Decision is SET ASIDE.