Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-25795             November 6, 1926

C. T. WILLIAMS, plaintiff-appellant,
vs.
TEODULFO SUNER, acting registrar of deeds of Capiz, defendant-appellee.

Block, Johnston & Greenbaum for appellant.

Attorney-General Jaranilla for appellee.

STREET, J.:

This is an application for the writ of mandamus which was presented in the Court of First Instance of
Capiz by C. T. Williams, for the purpose of compelling Teodulfo Suner as acting register of deeds for
the Province of Capiz to inscribe, or record, a sheriff's deed whereby four parcels of land and a
house have been conveyed by the sheriff of Capiz to the plaintiff Williams as purchaser at an
execution sale. Upon hearing the cause the trial court held that the document in question is not
registerable under existing law and absolved the defendant from the complaint. From this judgment
the plaintiff appealed.

It appears that in action heretofore prosecuted by the plaintiff Williams in the Court of First Instance
against Emiliano Hontiveros and the Visayan Refining Co., judgment had been rendered in favor of
the plaintiff; and an execution issuing thereon was levied upon all the right, title and interest of
Hontiveros in four parcels of land located in the municipality of Buruanga, Capiz, and in a house of
strong materials in Ibahay, of the same province. At the sheriff's sale conducted pursuant to said
execution on June 2, 1924, the plaintiff Williams became the purchaser of the properties mentioned
at price of P14,560. After the period of redemption had expired, and on September 16, 1925, Ramon
Hontiveros, as provincial sheriff, executed the document of which registration is now sought,
purporting to be a sheriff's deed in ordinary form conveying the properties which had been sold to
Williams under the circumstances above stated.

It is admitted that the properties in question are not registered under the Torrens system and had
never been registered under the system established by the Spanish Mortgage Law. It is also
admitted that, as to the description of the properties conveyed, the deed in question does not
conform in several particulars with the requirements set forth in paragraphs 2 and 3 of section 194 of
the Administrative Code, as amended by Act No. 2837 of the Philippine Legislature. The deficiencies
of said description, as exhibited in the appealed decision, are as follows: First, the document does
not state whether the boundaries of the several properties involved are indicated by visible
monuments, and of what they consist; secondly, the superficial area of the parcels conveyed is not
stated in square meters; thirdly, the instrument does not mention the name of person or persons now
in possession; fourthly, as regards the four parcels, the instrument does not show the permanent
improvements existing thereon; and lastly, as regards properties numbered 1 and 5, it does not
show the number of the assessment sheet of the property and its taxable value. For the reason
stated, the trial judge held that the deed is not registerable in the register for unregistered property
provided in the Act above-mentioned, and there being no other register kept by the registry of deeds
in which the instrument could, in his Honor's opinion, be properly entered, it was declared that the
instrument cannot be registered at all.

Section 124 of the Land Registration Act (No. 496) contains a provision continuing in force the law
relating to the Spanish system of registration already in force in these Islands; and the proviso to
said section 124 contemplates that any deed, mortgage, lease, or other instrument dealing with land
not registered under Act No. 496, whether already registered under the Spanish system or not, shall
be registered by the making of the proper indorsements thereon by the register and the recording of
such instrument in the proper volume. This idea was incorporated by the authors of the
Administrative Code in section 216 of Act No. 2657, which was carried into the present
Administrative Code (Act No. 2711) as section 194. In the part material to be here noted said section
reads as follows:

SEC. 194. Recording of instrument relating to unregistered land. — Any instrument affecting

the title of unregistered land, such as a deed, lease, mortgage, release, power of attorney, or
other conveyance or contract relative thereto may, after the due execution or
acknowledgment of such instrument, be delivered for record to the register of deeds for the
province or city where the land lies.

Upon the presentation of any such instrument, the register of deeds shall immediately
indorse thereon the true year, month, day, hour, and minute when the same was received;
and from the time of making such notation the instrument in question shall be constructively
deemed to have been recorded, and it shall be the duty of the register as soon as practicable
thereafter formally the record the instrument by extending it in full upon the proper record.
The register shall also indorse upon every such instrument a memorandum showing the
volume and page wherein the instrument is recorded.

Meanwhile there has been in force for many years in this Islands section 463 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, which, in its closing words, requires that a duplicate of a sheriff's certificate of sale
(meaning a sheriff's deed to land sold under execution) shall filed in the office of the register of
deeds of the province. In Garcia Sanchez vs. Rosauro (40 Phil., 231), this court, construing section
463 of the Code of Civil Procedure in connection with section 466 of the same Code, held that it was
intended that the sheriff's deed shall be recorded.

No provision is made in section 194 of the Administrative Code, as it originally stood, with respect to
the particular book in which the instruments relating to unregistered property shall be registered; it
was only required that the instrument should be extended in full upon the proper record. That
provision of course could not be complied with without keeping a book for the record of instruments
relating to unregistered property; and on March 8, 1919. Act No. 2837 of the Philippine Legislature
was approved, amending section 194 of the Administrative Code. In the second paragraph of said
section, as amended, it is declared that the register of deeds for each province shall keep a daybook
and a register book for unregistered real estate in accordance with the form to be prepared by the
Chief of the General Land Registration Office with the approval of the Secretary of Justice, thus
giving express legislative sanction to the keeping of proper books for notation and record of the
instruments here under consideration.

But said amendatory Act contains a number of new provisions of an entirely different tenor from the
earlier provisions contained in section 194 of the Administrative Code. The first paragraph of said
Act declares in substance that no instrument or deed affecting rights to real property not registered
under the Land Registration Act shall be valid, except as between the parties thereto, until such
instrument or deed shall have been registered. It is evident that this provision cannot be interpreted
to include conveyances made by ministerial officers, such as sheriff's deeds. It contemplates only
such instruments as may be created by agreement of the parties. The provision of law governing the
transmission of property in invitum by the act of the sheriff who has sold land under execution are
specific; and the instruments executed by him pursuant to such provisions must be taken to have full
legal effect, anything contained in Act No. 2837 to the contrary notwithstanding. Accordingly,
in Garcia Sanchez vs. Rosauro (40 Phil., 231), above cited, this court did not hesitate to require the
register of deeds to register a sheriff's deed, although the land which was the subject of the
conveyance had not been previously registered under any system of registration. In the matter of
Consulta No. 441 de los Abogados de Smith, Bell & Co. vs. Register of Deeds of Leyte  (48 Phil.,
656), this court again granted a writ of mandamus to compel the registration of a sheriff's deed, the
court holding that, as regards such instruments, the register of deeds exercises functions of a
ministerial nature.

In the case before us exception is taken to the instrument which is sought to be registered on the
ground that it does not comply, as to its descriptive matter, with the requisites specified in sections 2
and 3 of the amendatory Act (No. 2837). But inasmuch as the amendatory Act cannot be held to
apply to sheriff's deeds, the instrument in question must also be registered in this case.lawphil.net

It is true that no provision has as yet been made for the keeping of separate books of register for
sheriff's deeds; and we are of the opinion that until such provision is made, the sheriff's deeds must
necessarily be noted and recorded in the same books that are used for recording of other
instruments touching unregistered property. The two classes of instruments were registered in the
same books under section 194 of the Administrative Code as it originally stood; and since Act No.
2837 has changed the law in so far only as relates to instruments created by agreement, the deeds
of ministerial officers must necessarily still be registered in the same books. This will of course
continue until the register of deeds shall be supplied with separate books for the notation and
registration of the deeds of ministerial officers, — a deficiency in the law which presumably might be
cured by administrative action on the part of the proper department head or the Chief Executive.

In dismissing the petition in this case the trial judge seems to have assumed that the defects from
which the deed in question was supposed to suffer could be cured by the making of another deed by
the sheriff. In some cases possibly this could be done; but a moment's reflection will show that it is
not practicable to require sheriffs to incorporate in their deeds all the data required in the second and
third paragraphs of Act No. 2837. Sheriffs commonly take the description of the land which they sell
from the pleadings, decree, or some older document; and they cannot be expected to make an
official survey to discover whether the land is bounded by monuments as to ascertain just how many
square meters may be contained in the limits given. To require the sheriff to state this facts would be
in the main to require the impossible; and the result would be that for the most part the instruments
made by them in the course of official duty would be outlaws to the registration books, something
that the Legislature could not possibly not have intended. From what has been said it results that the
plaintiff is entitled to the writ of mandamus as prayed, and the same will issue in usual course,
without costs. So ordered.

Avanceña, C.J., Johnson, Villamor, Ostrand, Johns, Romualdez and Villa-Real, JJ., concur.