LTD Final Exam 2324-2

Arthur is the registered owner of Lot 12345 in TCT No 54321.  The lot was subsequently purchased by Lancelot for P10 Million.  To formalize the transaction, Arthur executed a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of Lancelot on May 12, 2023.  Before the purchasing the land, Lancelot checked TCT No. 54321 on file in the Registry of Deeds of Quezon City and found no liens and encumbrances annotated thereon.  Mordred, the illegitimate half-brother of Arthur, annotated on May 15, 2023, an adverse claim alleging that he is a co-owner of the land as it belonged to their late father Merlin that Arthur managed to transfer to his name by fraud.  On June 1, 2023, Lancelot was able to register the Deed of Absolute Sale executed by Arthur for Lot 1234, and was issued TCT No 65432.  A civil action for reconveyance was later filed by Mordred to recover his share in the lot.  Lancelot raised the defense of being an innocent purchaser for value having relied on the face of TCT No. 12345, which bore no lien or encumbrance.  Mordred claims otherwise for at the time of the registration of the Deed by Lancelot with the Registry of Deeds there was already an existing annotation of his adverse claim.  If you were the judge, how will you resolve the defense of Lancelot as an innocent purchaser for value.  (5)

Harry was able to successfully register Lot 777 on January 20, 2011 by way of ordinary land registration proceeding and was issued Original Certificate of Title No. 1000 by the Register of Deeds of Antipolo City on March 8, 2014.  In 2020, Lot 777 was adjudicated by the cadastral court to Helena, who filed a claim for the land in a cadastral proceeding initiated by the government.  Helena was issued OCT No. 2000 on October 1, 2020.  She took possession of the land and built a house thereon.  In 2022, she sold the house and lot to Karra for P5 Million.  In the same year, Karra was issued TCT No. 2001.  Harry was unaware of the said developments as he had immigrated to New York in 2015.  He only found out that Karra is residing on a Lot 777 and holds TCT No. 2001 in her name.  Harry consults you about the following:

a.     Who has a better right to Lot 777?  (5)

b.     Whether Karra may successfully invoke the defense of a buyer in good faith?  (5)

The DENR approved the homestead patent application of Roger over Lot 55 on August 8, 2020.  On August 30, 2020, Roger was issued OCT No. 100 after he registered the patent with the Register of Deeds.  Lito filed a complaint with the DENR challenging the homestead patent grant claiming that he has a better right being the person actually cultivating the land. 

a.     May the government still withdraw and cancel the patent awarded to Roger? (5)

b.     Will your answer be the same if the Roger has already registered the patent with the Registry of Deeds and issued an Original Certificate of Title? (5)

Tinay purchased a house and lot from Vista Land Realty Corp.  As she was in a hurry to report for her work in Australia, Tinay entrusted the Deed of Absolute Sale for the house and lot to her Tanya for the purpose of registering it with the Register of Deeds.  Eventually, TCT No. 666 was issued in the name of Tinay.  However, Tanya later sold land Teresa by impersonating Tinay and forging her signature.  Teresa paid P6 Million for the house and lot and was issued TCT No. 999. 

a.     May Tinay recover the land from Teresa?  (5)

b.     From your answer above, may the losing party recover from the Assurance Fund?  (5)

Leo filed a petition for the reconstitution of TCT No. 8910 issued for Lot No. 133, which was destroyed by the fire that razed the Registry of Deeds of Manila.  He alleged that he is the lawful owner of the lot and TCT No. 8910 bears his name.  He relies on the photocopy of TCT No. 8910 as the principal evidence for the reconstitution and cites Sec. 3(f) of RA No. 26 as authority as it allows “any other document, which in the judgment of the court, is sufficient and proper basis” for reconstitution.  The Solicitor General opposed the petition and argued that a photocopy does not come under the Sec. 3(f).  If you were the judge, how will rule on this issue?  (5)

A number of certificates of title was destroyed after the roof of the building housing the Registry of Deeds for Pasig was blown off by a typhoon in September, 2022.  Among those destroyed was the original copy of OCT No. 123 issued in the name of Pedro for Lot No. 111.  In January, 2024, Pedro filed a petition for reconstitution in the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City using as principal source the owner’s duplicate certificate in his possession.  The notice of hearing was published twice in the Official Gazette and posted in the bulletin board of the Pasig City Hall.  However, no copies of the notice were furnished to the adjacent landowners.  The Solicitor General argues that the failure to furnish copies of the notices to the adjacent landowners is a jurisdictional defect that prevented the trial court from acquiring jurisdiction.  Is the contention of the Solicitor General correct? (5)

Socrates is the registered owner under TCT No. 12345 of Lot 21212, located in Quezon City.   On January 10, 2024, Plato purchased the lot for P1 million evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale executed by Socrates in favor of Plato.  Upon learning of the transaction, Aristotle immediately executed a Notice of Lis Pendens and successfully registered it with the Registry of Deeds of Quezon City on January 11, 2024.  Aristotle claims that he is a co-owner of the lot.  On January 20, 2024, Plato sought to register the Deed of Absolute Sale for the land but it was denied by the Register of Deeds due to the disputed ownership recorded by Aristotle.  Dissatisfied, Plato consults you about the following:

a)     Was the Notice of Lis Pendens correctly recorded by the Register of Deeds?  (2)

b)     Was the Register of Deeds correct in refusing to register the Deed of Absolute Sale?  (2)

c)     What administrative remedy under PD No. 1529 can Plato resort to (1)