PD 1529

Section 2. Nature of registration proceedings; jurisdiction of courts. 

Judicial proceedings for the registration of lands throughout the Philippines shall
be in rem and shall be based on the generally accepted principles underlying the
Torrens system.
Courts of First Instance shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all applications
for original registration of title to lands, including improvements and interests
therein, and over all petitions filed after original registration of title, with power to
hear and determine all questions arising upon such applications or petitions.
The court through its clerk of court shall furnish the Land Registration
Commission with two certified copies of all pleadings, exhibits, orders, and
decisions filed or issued in applications or petitions for land registration, with the
exception of stenographic notes, within five days from the filing or issuance
thereof.

In Voluntary Dealings with Registered Land

Section 53. Presentation of owner's duplicate upon entry of new certificate. No
voluntary instrument shall be registered by the Register of Deeds, unless the
owner's duplicate certificate is presented with such instrument, except in cases
expressly provided for in this Decree or upon order of the court, for cause shown.
The production of the owner's duplicate certificate, whenever any voluntary
instrument is presented for registration, shall be conclusive authority from the
registered owner to the Register of Deeds to enter a new certificate or to make a
memorandum of registration in accordance with such instrument, and the new
certificate or memorandum shall be binding upon the registered owner and upon all
persons claiming under him, in favor of every purchaser for value and in good
faith.
Section 80. Execution of deed by virtue of judgment. Every court rendering
judgment in favor of the plaintiff affecting registered land shall, upon petition of
said plaintiff, order and parties before it to execute for registration any deed or
instrument necessary to give effect to the judgment, and shall require the
registered owner to deliver his duplicate certificate to the plaintiff or to the
Register of Deeds to be canceled or to have a memorandum annotated upon it. In
case the person required to execute any deed or other instrument necessary to give
effect to the judgment is absent from the Philippines, or is a minor, or insane, or for
any reason not amenable to the process of the court rendering the judgment, said
court may appoint a suitable person as trustee to execute such instrument which,
when executed, shall be entitled to registration.

JURISPRUDENCE ON AUTHORITY OF THE COURT:

G.R. No. 201821. September 19, 2018
PABLO B. MALABANAN, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES.
The RTC may properly take cognizance of reversion suits which do not call
for an annulment of judgment of the RTC acting as a Land Registration Court.
Actions for cancellation of title and reversion, like the present case, belong to the
class of cases that "involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any
interest therein" and where the assessed value of the property exceeds
P20,000.00, fall under the jurisdiction of the RTC. Consequently, no grave abuse
of discretion excess of jurisdiction can be attributed to the RTC in denying
RCAM's motion to dismiss
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, PETITIONER, VS. CLARO YAP,
RESPONDENT.
 G.R. No. 231116. February 07, 2018 
Case before the RTC: Petition for Registration of a parcel of land
RTC Ruling: Granted the petition and ordered the Register of Deeds to cancel and
order a new Certificate of Title.
CA ‘s Ruling: Affirmed the RTC
Issue: Was the RTC correct in cancelling and ordering a new Decree, and the
issuance of Original Certificate of Title.
HELD:
Again, we invite you back to the highlighted provision of Section 39 of PD
1529 which states that: "The original certificate of title shall be a true copy of the
decree of registration." This provision is significant because it contemplates an
OCT which is an exact replica of the decree. If the old decree will not be canceled
and no new decree issued, the corresponding OCT issued today will bear the
signature of the present Administrator while the decree upon which it was based
shall bear the signature of the past Administrator. This is not consistent with the
clear intention of the law which states that the OCT shall be true copy of the
decree of registration. Ostensibly, therefore, the cancellation of the old decree and
the issuance of a new one is necessary
We also find no merit in the above contention. There is nothing in the law
that limits the period within which the court may order or issue a decree. The
reason is what is stated in the consideration of the second assignment error,
that the judgment is merely declaratory in character and does not need to be
asserted or enforced against the adverse party. Furthermore, the issuance of a
decree is a ministerial duty both of the judge and of the Land Registration
Commission; failure of the court or of the clerk to issue the decree for the reason
that no motion therefore has been filed cannot prejudice the owner, or the person in
whom the land is ordered to be registered.