Amendments & Republication of Application

Regina filed an application for registration of her title over two (2) parcels of land,
designated in the survey plans accompanying the application as Parcel 1 with an area
of 5,000 Square Meters and Parcel 2 with an area of 1,500 Square Meters. The
application was set for hearing. The application and notice of hearing, containing the
approved technical descriptions of the 2 parcels of land applied for, were published in
the Official Gazette. On the date of the initial hearing, the land registration court
issued an order of general default no one having appeared nor filed an opposition to
the application. In the course of the hearing of the evidence for Regina, a “mistake” in
the survey plan was discovered and the court issued an order authorizing the
amendment of the said plan and the corresponding technical descriptions.
Accordingly said plans were amended, the amendments resulted in an increase of .05
Square Meters in Parcel 1 and the exclusion of 500 Square Meters from Parcel 2. The
amended plans were duly approved by the Lands Management Bureau (LMB) but
were not published. Thereafter judgment was rendered confirming the title of Regina
to both parcels of land on the basis of the amended plans. Later on the decrees of
registration and the corresponding certificates of title were issued in the name of
Regina. After six (6) months however, Ana appeared and moved for the reopening of
the decree on grounds of fatal infirmity, the area covered by the parcels of land
adjudicated to Regina being different from those stated in the application and notice
as published in the Official Gazette. Decide with reasons.

Under the law, publication is one of the essential bases of the jurisdiction of the court
inland registration and cadastral cases, and additional territory cannot be included by
amend of the plan without new publication. Conversely, if the amendment does not
involve an addition but instead a reduction of the original area that was published, no
new publication is required.

Here, Ana’s contention will not prosper. Republication is not required in this case.
The increase of 0.05 square meters in Parcel 1:
Under Section 19 of PD 1529 provides that amendments which consist in an increase
in area of land applied for shall be subject to the requirement of publication and
notice, this rule finds no application here.
In the case of Benin v. Tuason. There, the validity of a title was being challenged on
the ground that no notice or publication was made even with the introduction of an
amended plan, which plan reflected an increase in the area of the land applied for. The
Supreme Court in Benin held that the increase of 27.10 square meters is too minimal
to be of decisive consequence in the determination of the validity of the title.
Regarding the exclusion of 500 square meters in Parcel 2:
Republication is also not required.
In the case of Benin v. Tuason, it was held that if the amendment consists in the
exclusion of a portion of the area covered by the original application and the original
plan as previously published, a new publication is not necessary.
Considering that the amendment here consists in the exclusion of a portion of the area
covered by the original application, then a new publication is not required.