PROBATIVE VALUE OF A TORRENS TITLE

A Torrens title is generally a conclusive evidence of the ownership of the land referred to therein (Ching vs. Court of Appeals, 1990, 181 SCRA 9, 18; Sec. 49, Act 496). It is settled that mere possession cannot defeat the title of a holder of a registered Torrens title to real property (J.M. Tuazon & Co. Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 1979, 93SCRA 146 cited in Abad vs Court of Appeals, 1989, 179 SCRA 817, 826-827).

A Torrens certificate accumulates in one document a precise and correct statement of the exact status of the fee simple title which as owner possesses. The certificate, once issued, is the evidence of the title which the ownerhas (Legarda, et al., vs. Saleedy, 31 Phil. 590 [915].

A Torrens title, once registered, cannot be defeated, even by adverse, open, and notorious possession. A registered title under the Torrens system cannot be defeated by prescription. The title, once registered, is noticed to the whole world. All persons must take notice. No one can plead ignorance of the registration (Egao vs. Court of Appeals, 1989, 174 SCRA 484, 492 citing Legarda vs. Saleeby, 31 Phil. 590, 595; See also Sec. 46 of Act 496, Land Registration Act).

4. In the case of a transfer certificate of title, the same is enforceable in the hands of a holder in good faith and for valuable consideration or an “innocent purchaser for value.” An “innocent purchaser for value” is deemed, under the Torrens system, to include an innocent lessee, mortgagee, or other encumbrances for value (Ibid citing Leung Yee vs. Strong Machinery Co., 37 Phil. 644). Section 51, Paragraph 2 of the Property Registration Decree (P.D. 1529) of Land Registration Act (Act No. 496).

5. Section 3 of Presidential Decree No. 1073 dated January 25, 1977 further provides: “Section 3 the judicial confirmation of incomplete titles to public land based on unperfected Spanish Grants such as application for the purchase, prior to the transfer or sovereignty from Spanish to the United State shall no longer be allowed. However, P.D. 1529 should be read in conjunction with the provisions of this section shall not be construed as prohibiting any person claiming the same land under Section 48 ( and Section 48 (C) if he meets the conditions prescribed for Judicial confirmation of Torrens System.”

6. On July 7, 1989, Trial on the merits proceeded against the private respondents Ocampo, Buhain and Dela Cruz, the lower court rendered judgment dismissing the complaint on the subject land claim in the history of the Philippines in the subject controversy in these consolidated cases base on the following ground that; (a) private respondent are already the registered owners of the parcels of land covered by Torrens title which cannot be defeated by the alleged Spanish title. (b) To enjoy the presumption of validity as a last hurrah to champion their claim to the vast state covered by the Spanish title.

GENERAL RULE

A certificate of titles is not conclusive evidence of title if the same land had already been registered and an earlier certificate for the same is in existence whether wholly or partly, the certificate that is earlier title in date prevails. (Heir of Luis J. Gonzales vs. Gonzaga vs. Court of Appeal, 261 SCRA 327)

A land registration court has no jurisdiction to order the registration of land already decreed in the name of another in earlier land registration case. (Laburada vs. Land Registration Authority, 387 SCRA 333) a second decree for the same land is, therefore, null and void (Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System vs. Court of Appeal, 215 SCRA 783) once declared by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Torrens System Title to the land is already a res judicata binding on the whole world, the proceeding being in rem (Lahora vs. Dayanghirang, Jr., 37 SCRAA 346).

Proceeding in rem. – 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. (P.D. 1529, Sec. 2)

Land registration under the Torrens system is a judicial proceeding in rem (P.D. 1529. Sec. 2), intended to confirm and register the ownership or title of a person over the land. (see Republic vs. Reyes, 71 SCRA 450, 458; Development Bank of the Phil. Vs. Court of Appeals, 331 SCRA 267, 281)

In rem proceedings such as land registration constitutes constructive notice to the whole world. (Calalang vs. Register of Deeds of Quezon City, 208 SCRA 215) (Machine copy is hereto attached as “ÁNNEX” and made an integral part of this paragraph.)

source(s):
http://blptorrenssystemlawfoundation.com/torrens1.html
http://blptorrenssystemlawfoundation.com/torrens7.html
http://blptorrenssystemlawfoundation.com/torrens8.html

REASON TO ABOLISH LRC-REGISTRATION OF DEEDS

SCHEME I
Issuance of new Approved Survey Plan in Pre-patent
Issuance of Pre-patent Original Certificate of Title at a good price per square meter and better price, the LRC-Register of Deeds people mutilate Pre-patent OCT for the immediate issuance of Transfer Certificate of Title in the name of the conspirators – fraudulent land owners.

SCHEME II
Issuance of ante-dated Approval Survey Plan with micro-film
Issuance of ante-dated Decree over the subject land with some Spanish Character and Language.
Issuance of ante-dated OCT to TCT in exchange of lucrative sum per square meter depending on the location of the land with Spanish character and language.

SCHEME III
Issuance of ante-dated Approval Survey Plan with micro-film
Issuance of ante-dated Decree
Issuance of ante-dated Title from OCT to TCT in exchange for 30.00 to 40.00 per square meter


For those who cannot pay in spot cash, the applicant will be required to pay fifty (50) percent down payment and the Letter of Guarantee of Payment by the financing private bank or, most of the time, by the recommendation of those influential persons from Malacañang Palace, the.

SCHEME IV
Issuance of ante-dated Approval Survey Plan in the name of LRC-BUREAU OF LANDS employees’ cohorts and relatives.
Issuance of ante-dated OCT and then TCT in the name of their cohorts and relatives
Then sell the land to the developers or buyers
Beforehand, the developers-claimants would be engaged in the hiring of professional squatters to occupy the area before the document of ownership is processed to guarantee the occupancy of the land

Source:
blptorrenssystemlawfoundation.com/torrens9.html


SCHEME V
Issuance of government infrastructure permit to the applicant to occupy the land
Fencing and installing paid security personnel.
Through recommendation of Malacañang authority, application procure development loan from government financing institutions and eventually for approval by mere presentation of the following:

a.) TCT form fake origin to procure
Building permit with Project Plan.
Authority to Develop and permit to sell issued by the Department of Public Works Building Permit Division and the Human Settlement Regulatory Commission (HSRC)
Most of the developers absconded the funds that had released under bank loans to diversify into another project but some pursue the development as regular business like those thriving real estate developers who became millionaires under the blessing of these schemes to the predicament of the legitimate land owners, the Noble BLPD FOUNDATION, INC., and finally to the damage of the General Public.

Besides, the government never possessed said better ownership and legal right over the land than what the legal owner have in as much as the legal authority by conveyance that the ANG BAGONG LAHING FILIPINO DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION, INCORPORATED, remained physically fit, alive and kicking with millions of member to fight back against government interest to land grab the land owned by a private NGO. The controversy of the government strongly the deceptive, blatant lie allegation of the Republic of the Philippines that the said owners over the subject land were dead and no survivor to claim it so it should necessarily be reverted to Public Domain, are allegations full of deception beyond the basis of truth that the government failed and continuously failing to prove its better and stronger rights over the land in question against the rightful owners’ evidence therefore allegations are purely hearsay in the side of the government. And face such abusive laws, unlawful conducts and act orchestrated by the oligarch government leaders of this generation, not only for the deprived parties but for the entire Filipino people for our nation’s economic breakthrough from its century ailing and sickly society with suffering citizenry.

That the Ang Bagong Lahing Filipino Development Foundation, Incorporated, herein respondent—lawful owner holder of Torrens System Proceeding and Registration of Property Title and Deeds who has been in possession of subject land in dispute, the action is to quite all the aforesaid titles because has no longer probative value on the reason that the Spanish Mortgage Law and Spanish Title is supposed to be abrogated for national interest, and that Land Title cannot facilitate the purpose of the True owners against the government and other parties is imprescriptibly in nature (Baladay vs. Castrillo, et al, 1961, SCRA 99, Ramirez vs. Court of Appeals, et al, 1969, 30 SCRA 297). (Machine copy is hereto attached as “ÁNNEX” and made an integral part of this paragraph.) DWCA P. 102

With the blessing of our Supreme Being with His judicial enhancement over the victims of injustices and greatest land grabbing scandals in Philippine history, To settle once and for all the issue of ownership through conveyance over the land under The mother title OCT -779, was transferred to TCT-8982, Decree No. 10198, TCT-8983, Decree 10128, TCT-8984, Decree No. 10139, covered by Original Survey Plan II-4509, date of Original Survey, March 23-27, September 8-15, 1909, April 9-12, and June 3-24, 1910, approved on October 23, 1911,

source:
blptorrenssystemlawfoundation.com/torrens10.html