FOR :

THROUGH :

SUBJECT : BRIEF DISCUSSION ON THE INTEGRITY OF THE

` TORRENS TITLE

FROM : THE DIRECTOR

LAND MANAGEMENT BUREAU

DATE : __________ 2005

This Memorandum is submitted in compliance to the instruction made by

______________________ to the Land Management Bureau (LMB) during
the February 16, 2005 meeting at the ________________________ to
submit a report pertaining to the integrity of the Torrens Title System.

I. INTRODUCTION
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is the
primary agency of the government that has jurisdiction over the disposition
of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain. The Secretary of the
DENR acts as the Executive Officer who has direct executive control of the
survey, classification, lease, sale or any other forms of concessions or
disposition and management of the lands of the public domain.1 The DENR
disposes these A and D lands by way of Homestead, Sales and Free
Patents under the provisions of Commonwealth Act 141, otherwise known as
the Public Land Act of 1936 in relation to Executive Order No. 192, the law
Reorganizing the DENR. After disposition, these A and D lands are

1 Executive Order No. 192, Providing for the Reorganization of the Department of
Environment, Energy and Natural Resources; Renaming it as the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and for other Purposes.
 2

converted to private property that have to be registered in the Torrens

System of Land Registration.2
The registration of these patents or grants within the Torrens System as well
as its custody fall under the jurisdiction of the Land Registration Authority
(LRA) pursuant to Act 496 and subsequently, Presidential Decree 1529.
Thus, strictly speaking, the safeguarding of the integrity of the Torrens
System is the mandate and responsibility of the LRA.
However, as will be discussed, the DENR control over survey, classification
and disposition of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain has a
direct impact on the registration and/or titling of the land under the Torrens
System.

II. Disposition of Public Lands

The Philippines passed to the Spanish Crown by discovery and conquest in

the 16th century and our lands, whether agricultural, mineral or forest were
under the exclusive patrimony and dominion of the Spanish Crown. This
concept of public land ownership is known as the “Regalian Doctrine”.
Under the Regalian Doctrine, all lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly
within private ownership are presumed to belong to the State3. The
Spaniards first introduced the doctrine to the Philippines through the Laws of
the Indies and the Royal Cedulas, specifically, Law 14, Title 12, Book 4 of
the Novisima Recopilacion de Leyes de las Indias4 which laid the foundation
that "all lands that were not acquired from the Government, either by
purchase or by grant, belong to the public domain." Upon the Spanish
conquest of the Philippines, ownership of all "lands, territories and
possessions" in the Philippines passed to the Spanish Crown.

During this time, the King was the source of all assorted rights to ownership
in land. Under the laws of the Indies (Book 4, Title 12, Law I) the King was

2Section 103 of Presidential Decree 1529 (Property Registration Decree) previously under
Section 122 of Act 496 (Land Registration Act of 1902).
3 Republic vs. Sayo, 191 SCRA 71 (1990).
4 "We, having acquired full sovereignty over the Indies, and all lands, territories, and
possessions not heretofore ceded away by our royal predecessors, or by us, or in our
name, still pertaining to the royal crown and patrimony, it is our will that all lands which are
held without proper and true deeds of grants be restored to us according as they belong to
us, in order that after reserving before all what to us or to our viceroys, audiencias, and
governors may seem necessary for public squares, ways, pastures, and commons in those
places which are peopled, taking into consideration not only their present condition, but also
their future and their probable increase, and after distributing to the natives what may be
necessary for tillage and pasturage, confirming them in what they now have and giving them
more if necessary, all the rest of said lands may remain free and unencumbered for us to
dispose as we may wish."
 3

authorized to distribute land to his vassals to foster discovery and settlement

of the islands5. Hence, private ownership of land could only be acquired
through royal concessions which were documented in various forms, such
as (1) Titulo Real or Royal Grant, (2) Concesion Especial or Special Grant,
(3) Titulo de Compra or Title by Purchase and (4) Informacion Posesoria or
Possessory Information title obtained under the Spanish Mortgage Law or
under the Royal Decree of January 26, 1889. These lands that were
disposed by the Spanish Crown lost its public character and became private
lands6.

The Treaty of Paris of 1898 transferred the sovereignty of the Philippines

from Spain to the United States. Under said Treaty, Spain relinquished “all
the buildings, wharves, barracks, forts, structures, public highways, and
other immovable property which, in conformity with law, belong to the public
domain, and as such belong to the Crown of Spain” to the United States.
Said cession did not include “property or rights which by law belong to the
peaceful possession of property of all kinds, of provinces, municipalities,
public or private establishments, ecclesiastical or civic bodies, or any other
associations having legal capacity to acquire and possess property”7
The United States, in short, was bound to respect the property rights
acquired by private persons under the Spanish Crown, thus, these
properties could not be considered as part of public land that may be
disposed by the government or otherwise use for public purposes.8

Philippine Bill of 1902 was passed by the United States Congress ratifying
the Philippine Commission created by President McKinley and provided for
the administration of civil government in the Philippines. The Commission
enacted Act 218 (Act Creating the Bureau of Public Lands) and Act 926
(Public Land Act of 1903) which became the basis of public land disposition
thereafter. Dispositions of public lands by the Bureau under these laws were
by way of homestead, free patent, sale and lease of public lands suitable for
agriculture. Act 926 also formally recognizes titles, grants and concessions
given by Spain to private individuals requiring only the registration of the
same to the Land Registration Court of the Philippine Islands for

5 CASSANOVA, R., Public Land Laws of the Philippines, Philippines-Australia Land

Administration and Management Project, 2002
6 Ignacio Palomo, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 95608. January 21, 1997.
7 Article VIII of the Treaty of Paris

8 Bueneventura vs. Commanding General Philipine Division, G.R. No. 1935. November
6, 1906 and Ichausti & Company vs. Commanding General Philipine Division, G.R. No.
2127. November 1, 1906.
 4

confirmation of its claim.9 The use of Spanish title as evidence of ownership

however was discontinued after the passage of Presidential Decree No. 892
in 1976.

The law on public lands disposition was later amended on July 1, 1919 with
the enactment of Act 2874 (An Act to Amend and Compile the Laws Relative
to Lands of the Public Domain). Act 2874, for the first time, classified lands
of the public domain into Alienable or Disposable, Timber and Mineral.10
Under Section 8 of said act, only those lands declared open to disposition
or concession that have been officially delimited and classified and, when
practicable, surveyed, and which have not been reserved for public or quasi-
public uses, nor appropriated by the Government, nor in any manner
become private property, nor those on which a private right authorized and
recognized by this Act or any other valid law may be claimed, or which,
having been reserved or appropriated, have ceased to be so.

After the passage of the 1935 Constitution, Commonwealth Act No. 141
amended Act 2874 in 1936. CA 141, as amended, remains to this day as the
existing general law governing the classification and disposition of lands of
the public domain other than timber and mineral lands, under the following:

Classification for Purposes of Administrative Disposition

a. Agricultural;
b. Residential, Commercial, Industrial or similar productive purposes11;
c. Educational, charitable or other similar purposes; and
d. Reservations for town site and for public and quasi-public purposes.

Public Lands suitable for Agriculture shall be disposed under:

a. Homestead Settlement (Chapter IV, C.A. 141)
b. Sale of Agricultural Lands (Chapter V)
c. Lease of Agricultural Lands (Chapter VI)
d. Free Patent [Administrative Confirmation of Imperfect Title] (Chapter
VII)
e. Judicial Confirmation of Imperfect or Incomplete title (Chapter VIII)

Residential, Commercial and Industrial Lands of the public domain are

disposed only by sales or lease (Chapter IX, C.A. 141).

9 Section 54, Act 926 “The Public Land Act”

10CHAPTER II, Classification, Delimitation, and Survey of Lands of the Public Domain, for
the Concession Thereof, Sections 6 to 10, Act 2874.
 5

Whenever public lands are alienated, granted, or conveyed to persons or to

public or private corporations, the same should be brought under the
operation of the Torrens System and shall become registered lands. It shall
be the duty of the official issuing the instrument of alienation, grant, or
conveyance in behalf of the Government to cause such instrument, before
its delivery to the grantee, to be filed with the register of deeds and to be
there registered like other deeds and conveyances. After registration, a
certificate shall be entered as in other cases of registered land and an
owner's duplicate certificate issued to the grantee. In effect, the act of
registration is the operative act to convey and affect the lands since without
said registration, the patents or conveyance issued operates only as a
contract between the government and the grantee.12 Public lands disposed
therefore completely loose its public character and became private lands
only upon registration of the disposition to the land registration office.

III. Land Registration

During the Spanish period, the system of registration was under the Laws of
the Indies then followed by the Ley Hipotecaria, or the Mortgage Law of
1893. The Spanish Mortgage Law13 provided for the systematic registration
of titles and deeds as well as possessory claims. The law sought to register
and tax lands pursuant to the Royal Decree of 1880. The Royal Decree of
1894, or the "Maura Law," was partly an amendment of the Mortgage Law as
well as the Laws of the Indies, as already amended by previous orders and
decrees. This was the last Spanish land law promulgated in the Philippines.
It required the "adjustment" or registration of all agricultural lands, otherwise
the lands shall revert to the state.14

This system is rather complicated as several kinds of land titles are issued in
particular: (1) the titulo real or royal grant, (2) the concession special or
special grant; (3) the "the composicion con el estado" title or adjustment title;
(4) the titulo de compra or title by purchase and (5) the informacion
possessoria or possessory information title which could become a "titulo
gratuito" or a gratuitous title.15 When the Bureau of Public Lands was

12 Section 122 of Act 496; and under Section 103 of PD 1529

13The Spanish Mortgage Law is more of a law on registration of property than a mortgage
law.
14Isagani Cruz, et al. vs. Secretary of the DENR, et al., G.R. No. 135385, December 6,
2000.
15 Director of Forestry vs. Muños, G.R. No. L-24796, June 28, 1968.
 6

created under Act 218, it was authorized, among others, to collect and safely
keep all existing Spanish records relating to the public lands or their
conveyances.16

In the meantime, in order to establish a system of registration by which

recorded title becomes absolute, indefeasible and imprescriptible, the
legislature passed Act 496, otherwise known as the Land Registration Act,
which took effect on February 1, 1903. Act 496 placed all registered lands in
the Philippines under the Torrens system.17

The Torrens system requires the government to issue a certificate of title

stating that the person named in the title is the owner of the property
described therein, subject to liens and encumbrances annotated on the title
or reserved by law. The certificate of title is indefeasible and imprescriptible
and all claims to the parcel of land are quieted upon issuance of the
certificate.18 Further, the rights acquired by the registrant are guaranteed by
the government for which purpose there is provided an assurance fund
which is made available to pay for damages that may be suffered by the
registrant as a consequence of the operation of the Land Registration Act. A
Torrens title is conclusive against the whole world, including the government,
and to a holder thereof in good faith it is guaranteed to be indefeasible,
unassailable and imprescriptible.19 PD 1529, known as the Property
Registration Decree enacted on June 11, 1978, amended and updated Act
496.

There are three fundamental principles to the Torrens System; namely the
Mirror Principle, Curtain Principle and Insurance Principle.

• The Mirror Principle states that whatever is shown or reflected on

the Certificate of Title is guaranteed by the State to be correct.
• The Curtain Principle means that once a Certificate of Title under
the Torrens System is issued all other interests which may have
related to the land previously are negated. It is not possible to "look
behind the title to previous interests".
• The Insurance Principle means that the information on the
Certificate of Title is guaranteed by the State.

16 Act 218, An Act Creating the Bureau of Public Lands, September 2, 1901
17 Noblejas & Noblejas, Registration of Land Titles and Deeds, 1992 Ed.
18 Edna Collado, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 107764, October 4, 2002.
19 Peña, Peña and Peña, Registration of Land Titles and Deeds, 1994.
 7

The Torrens System as conceived had four qualities being speed, simplicity,
cheapness and suitability to the needs of the community.20

Though the Torrens system became effective as early as 1902, the old
system of registration under the Spanish Mortgage Law continued and was
not abolished by American colonial government. However, due to the
introduction of the Torrens System, land titles registered under the Spanish
Mortgage law migrated to the new title system. More so, newly issued
certificate of titles coming from public land dispositions were being registered
in the Torrens system and thus, the Spanish mortgage law slowly died. By
1970s, due to disuse, to simplify evidence of and ownership, and to remove
the confusion in land rights recording caused by these Spanish titles and
grants, Presidential Decree No. 892 was enacted and became effective
February 16, 1976 declaring that Spanish Titles can no longer be used as
evidence of land ownership. Under the same decree, all lands not under the
Torrens System are all be considered as unregistered lands including those
registered under the Spanish Mortgage law.21

Said legislation was enacted due to the fraudulent sales, transfers, and other
forms of conveyances of large tracts of public and private lands to
unsuspecting and unwary buyers perpetrated by unscrupulous persons
claiming ownership under Spanish titles or grants of dubious origin. These
fraudulent transactions have often resulted in conflicting claims and
litigations between legitimate Torrens title holders, bona fide occupants or
applicants of public lands and the holders of, or person claiming rights under
the said Spanish titles or grants, thus creating confusion and instability in
property ownership and threatening the peace and order conditions in the
areas affected.

IV. General Condition of the Torrens System of Land Registration in the

Philippines.22

For over forty years after its introduction in the Philippines, the Torrens
System of Land Registration was enjoying the confidence and trust of the
people. Its credibility did not experience any serious challenge. It has been
observed that the land records were complete and available when needed.
However, as a result of the last world-war, a sizable portion of the records

20 DARLYMPOL, K. Cadastral System within Australia, Department of Geomatics, University

of Melbourne, 1994.
21 Republic vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 73085, June 4, 1990.

22 Land Administration and Management Project Paper on Fake and Spurious Title,
Philippines-Australia Land Administration and Management Project, 2002
 8

was burned, lost or destroyed. More records were further lost due to
pilferages and poor storage facilities; others were lost because of poor
handling and the movement of records from one office location to another.

The loss of records has brought about increasing incidence of land-frauds.

Fake-title racketeers victimizing the gullible became rampant; and squatter
colonies occupying vacant or idle lands mushroomed, rendering helpless the
holders of Certificates of Title from enjoying security to their landholdings
that the system seeks to protect. Landowners access to their titled property
was made doubly difficult because most of these squatters were organized.
Courts were clogged with cases involving issues on landholdings and there
are times the media were being utilized unwittingly by trying to belittle and
embarrass government efforts to keep the people's faith in the system. In
the late 1980s, misfortunes struck twice in succession when hundreds of
thousands of land titles and other valuable documents were burned when
fire gutted down two big registries in the country- the Registries of Deeds of
Bulacan in 1987 and Quezon City in 1988.

As a result, numerous fake titles began to surface and syndicated land

related transactions increased thereby victimizing the unwary public. With
the syndicates working in cahoots with some unscrupulous elements in the
bureaucracy, the faking of titles have never been so lucrative an endeavor
as it is today.

At present, this nefarious trade continuous to wreak havoc on the Torrens

System. However, this illegal activity is not yet a common practice nation-
wide; it is only true in areas where there are massive loss of records and in
urban centers where the cost of real-estate is becoming more difficult for the
common man to afford. In view of this problem, there is a need for
government intervention for the formulation of the new strategies to combat
the proliferation of fake and fraudulent titles. The efficacy and integrity of the
Torrens System must be protected and preserved to abate the unsettling and
deleterious effects that fake or spurious titles bring about on the economy.
Furthermore, such may well be a potent cause of social unrest and agrarian
agitation.

V. Fake/Spurious and Fraudulent/Irregular Certificates of Title.

There are two kinds of illegal titles that are being circulated.

First, fake/spurious titles are those certificates of title which have not gone
through the regular process of registration or have not been duly issued by
 9

the Register of Deeds. These include the following:

• Fabricated or counterfeit certificates of title – These are counterfeit

forms having the same appearance as the genuine title, which are
printed by unauthorized persons.
• Certificates of title in genuine title-forms but the signature of the RD is
forged or affixed without authority – These are prepared using
genuine judicial forms that have been unlawfully obtained.
• Fabricated, fake or spurious owner's duplicate certificates of title -
These are the fabricated copies of the owner's duplicate certificate of
titles which are contained on a genuine title form or on a counterfeit
title form. The authentic owner's duplicate certificate of title may or
may not be in the possession of the real owner.
• Fabricated or spurious original copies of certificates of title – These
are fabricated copies of the certificates of title that are inserted in the
files of the RD.

Second, fraudulent or irregular certificates of title are those issued and

signed by the Register of Deeds but its issuance is tainted with irregularity or
are issued on the basis of defective and/or insufficient supporting
documents, such as falsified survey plan, fraudulent conveyances or
patents, etc., a fact that is known or unknown to the Register of Deeds;
however, copies of these titles are among the records on file in the registry.
These include the following:

• Titles issued pursuant to a Patent or Decree covering non-registrable

properties such as forestlands, rivers, creeks, and other similar areas
• Titles issued on the basis of spurious or falsified court decision or
order for the issuance of decree relating to land registration cases
• Titles issued on the basis of spurious deed of conveyance over
patrimonial properties of the government (e.g. Friar Lands and other
Government owned lands)
• Titles issued on the basis of spurious, falsified, or altered survey plan
• Titles issued on the basis of a survey plan with expanded land area
• Titles with un-authorized alteration (i.e. change of owners' name,
expansion of area of ownership)
• Double/Multiple issuance of title covering the same parcel of land
• Certificate of title under the name of an individual, corporation,
partnerships, associations not qualified to own lands .
• Certificate of title pursuant to an order issued by the court for the
reconstitution of title obtained through fraud and misrepresentation
covering a parcel of land already covered by an existing valid title
• Certificate of title without the accompanying Certificate Authorizing
Registrations (CARs)/evidence of payment of capital gains tax,
 10

donor's or estate tax and documentary stamp tax issued by the

BIR or/with the accompanying falsified/Spurious CARs or multiple
use of CARs
• Certificate of title signed by official who, under existing law, is not
authorized to sign the same
• Certificate of title with spurious or falsified deed of conveyance

VI. Causes of the Proliferation of Fraudulent Titles

Graft and corruption in the government agencies/personnel is the main

cause of the proliferation of fraudulent titles. This is done by corrupt officials
by issuance of administrative patents and judicial decree involving lands that
have been previously titled, approving reconstitution of an alleged lost or

destroyed title through Judicial Proceedings on lands that are already

covered by existing and duly issued titles and issuance of patents or decree
on lands that are not registrable (i.e. forest, timber and mineral lands, etc.).

These corrupt officials were able to devise these fraudulent schemes

because of the poor state of land records system in the Philippines as a
result of the following:

1. Destruction of records through force majure (i.e. fire, flood, typhoon,

etc.)
2. The continuous transfer of the location of government offices handling
sensitive land records
3. Records are not provided adequate and safe storage facilities/areas
4. Low priority in the allocation of government budget on projects
involving the improvement in Records Management System
5. Negative attitude or indifference on the value of records; only realizing
its importance when a particular need arises

VII. What Needs To Be Done? 23

1. Adopt a single/uniform Cadastral Index Map (CIM) – The LRA and

the DENR are both maintaining control maps known as the
Municipal Index Map (MIM) and the Projection Map, respectively.
These maps are being used as tools in plan-approval and titling,
more particularly in determining whether or not overlapping exist
between two properties. The problem is that the data contained in
these control maps are not the same, resulting in confusion.

23Land Administration and Management Project Paper on Fake and Spurious Title,
Philippines-Australia Land Administration and Management Project, 2002
 11

Thus, there is a need to consolidate the contents of these maps in

one single/uniform map to be known as the Cadastral Index Map
(CIM). The Land Administration and Management Project (LAMP)
has proposed for the establishment of a single control map known as
the Cadastral Index Map (CIM), to be maintained in the RD. Plotted
on this map includes the boundaries of all the titled and untitled lands
and all lands that are not eligible or susceptible fortitling (e.g. forest,
mineral lands, etc.) that are situated within the jurisdiction of the RD.

The CIM shall be a major component of the Geographic Information

System (GIS). It should be noted that while the CIM is used to
manage and control the land records process, it does not replace the
primary land records such as certificate of title or survey plans.

2. Concerned government agencies (i.e. LRA, RD, DENR, Assessor's

Office and BIR) shall computerize their respective land transaction
and allow linkage among them. Each of the concerned government
agencies will computerize their respective land transactions. The
database generated shall be linked in a network system that would
allow sharing of information.

3. Vigilance of the Court in the acceptance and admission of secondary

evidence of titles considering the number of fake titles and must
exercise caution and vigilance in order to guard the indefeasibility
and imprescriptibility of the Torrens Registration System against
spurious claims and forged documents.

4. Strengthen public awareness on fake and spurious titles through an

intensified information dissemination campaign using tri-media.

5. Encourage the public to report fake/spurious and fraudulent titles to

proper agencies.

6. Create special teams to investigate and prosecute cases involving

fake/spurious and fraudulent titles.

VIII. List of Known Fake/Fraudulent Titles Used in Land Scams

• Estate of the late Don Mariano San Pedro

This is the most fantastic land claim in the history of the Philippines.
The heirs of the late Mariano San Pedro y Esteban laid claim and
 12

have been laying claim to the ownership of, against third persons and
the Government itself, a total land area of approximately 173,000
hectares or "214,047 quinones," on the basis of a Spanish title,
entitled "Titulo de Propriedad Numero 4136" dated April 25, 1894. The
claim, according to the San Pedro heirs, appears to cover lands in the
provinces of Nueva Ecija, Bulacan, Rizal, Laguna and Quezon; and
such Metro Manila cities as Quezon City, Caloocan City, Pasay City,
City of Pasig and City of Manila, thus affecting in general lands
extending from Malolos, Bulacan to the City Hall of Quezon City and
the land area between Dingalan Bay in the north and Tayabas Bay in
the south.

Titulo de Propriedad No. 4136 was declared null and void by the
Supreme Court24 and the heirs, agents, privies and/or anyone acting
for and in behalf of the estate of the late Mariano San Pedro y
Esteban are expressly disallowed to exercise any act of possession
or ownership or to otherwise, dispose of in any manner the whole or
any portion of the estate covered by Titulo de Propriedad No. 4136
and they are ordered to immediately vacate the same.

Claimants: Engracio San Pedro, Candido Gener, Rosa Pantalleon,

Vicente Pantaleon, Eleuterio Pantaleon, Trinidad San Pedro, Rodrigo
San Pedro, Ricardo Nicolas, Felisa Nicolas, and Leona San Pedro

• The Kadakilaan Estate/Heirs of Hermogenes Rodriguez

The alleged heirs of Hermogenes Rodriguez claims vast tracts of land

in Luzon by virtue of Titulo de Propiedad de Terrenos of 1891; Royal
Decree No. 01-4, Protocol No. 1891; Decree No. 659, approved Plan
of the Bureau of Lands No. 12298 dated 10 September 1963 and PD
1143. These people styling themselves as “Kadakilaan Estate” have
been issuing instruments appearing like Government Patents to
individuals and furnishing the DOJ, DENR, LMB of copies of the
same. LMB has referred this matter to the NBI for investigation.

Per opinion of the LRA contained in its letter dated April 15, 1992,
Titutlo de Propriedad de Terrenos of 1891, Royal Decree No. 01-4
covering the so called Kadakilaan Estate are absolutely inadmissible
and ineffective in sa ofar as proof of private ownership for not having
brought within the operation of Act 496 pursuantto PD 892 dated
February 16, 1976. This PD provides that all holder of Spanish Titles

24Intestate Estate of Don Mariano Esteban vs. IAC, G.R. No. 103727, December 18, 1996 and
Engracio San Pedro, et al., vs. CA, G.R. No. 106496, December 18, 1996.
 13

or grants should apply for registration of their land under Act 496
within six (6) months from the effectivity of this decree: and thereafter,
the Spanish title cannot be used as evidence of land ownership in any
registration proceedings under the Torrens system. The LRA
pronouncement effectively debunked Section 8 of PD 1143 relied on
by the petitioners which stated that said “Titulo” was registered with
the Land Registration Commission. Furthermore, the contents of
petitioner’s copy of PD 1143 is entirely different from that issued by
then President Ferdinand E. Marcos.

Assuming, however, that theirs is authentic still question as to its

efficacy arises since the effectivity thereof (May 17, 1977) was after
the lapse of the period within which Spanish titles have to be
presented for registration in accordance with PD 892.

In Special Proceedings No. 1110 for Declaration of Heirship ,

Appointment of Administrator and Settlement of Estate of the late
Hermogenes Rodriguez, Antonio Rodriguez, Macario Rodriguez,
Delfin Rodriguez and Consuelo M. Rodriguez before the RTC Branch
34 in Iriga City, the court, in its amended Decision dated 13 August
1999 which had become final and executory, declared petitioners
Henry F. Rodriguez, Corteza F. Rodriguez and Rosalina R.G. Pellosis
as the heirs with all the rights to succeed to the latter’s estates.
Thereafter, an inventory of the estates was made which consisted of
several real properties located in different parts of the country the
bases of which are Titulo de Proprieded de Terrrenos of 1891 and
1143. Petitioners are now filing their requests for the issuance of tax
declarations and conduct of final survey leading to the titling of the
same. In fact, they were able to secure recently an Order from the
Regional Trial Court in Bicol mandating DENR Region 3 to survey one
of the inventoried properties in their favor.

Finally, it may not be amiss to state that the inclusion of property in

proceedings for the settlement of estates is not competent proof of
ownership thereof. The determination by the court is merely prima
facie and is without prejudice to the right of interested persons to
raise the question in the proper court and in the proper action
(Garicila Vs. Martir, L-9233, June 29, 1957). The decision is not
conclusive and may be subject to final decision in a separate action
(Garcia vs. Garcia, 67 Phil 353).

The efficacy and integrity of the Torrens System must be protected and
preserved to ensure the stability and security of land titles for otherwise land
 14

ownership in the country would be rendered erratic and restless and can
certainly be a potent and veritable cause of social unrest and agrarian
agitation. However, the fight against fake titles requires not only police
action but also institutional changes in our land agencies and laws. Lapses
in the government systems and processes are often used by land syndicates
in perpetuating this crime. The DENR had been at the forefront of this
advocacy as the primary agency pushing for reforms in land administration
through the Land Administration and Management Project (LAMP).

FOR THE ________________ CONSIDERATION

ATTY. ERWIN L. TIAMSON

Director of Lands