LAND TITLES AND DEEDS

REGISTRATION UNDER ACT 3344

Section 113

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 892 February 16, 1976

DISCONTINUANCE OF THE SPANISH MORTGAGE SYSTEM OF

REGISTRATION AND OF THE USE OF SPANISH TITLES AS
EVIDENCE IN LAND REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS

Section 1. The system of registration under the Spanish Mortgage Law is discontinued,
and all lands recorded under said system which are not yet covered by Torrens title
shall be considered as unregistered lands.

All holders of Spanish titles or grants should apply for registration of their lands under
Act No. 496, otherwise known as the Land Registration Act, within six (6) months
from the effectivity of this decree. Thereafter, Spanish titles cannot be used as evidence
of land ownership in any registration proceedings under the Torrens system.

Hereafter, all instruments affecting lands originally registered under the Spanish
Mortgage Law may be recorded under Section 194 of the Revised Administrative
Code, as amended by Act 3344;

GOVERNING LAWS:

-Sec. 194 of the Revised Administrative Code, as amended by Act 3344.

- Presidential Decree No. 892
- Sec. 113 of the Property Registration Decree

Thus, if for example, a registered land which is the subject of a transaction, is recorded
under ACT 3344, the same does not affect third persons since registration was not done in the
proper registry. This is applicable especially if Art. 1544 of the Civil Code is invoked.

PRINCIPAL PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION

- Registration is not necessary for the validity of a contract between the parties.
- To notify third persons not parties to the contract that a transaction has been entered into.
- The conveyance of unregistered land shall not be valid against any person unless
registered, except:
1. The grantor;
2. His heirs and devises;
3. third persons having actual notice or knowledge thereof;

SEC. 113 applies to instruments created by agreement of the parties.

- applies to voluntary dealings

Registration of Lands and Interest under Act No. 3344 is PURELY VOLUNTARY

-The Registrar of Deeds is not authorized to effect any registration under this system unless
the parties have expressly agreed to register their transaction thereunder.
REGISTRATION OF INSTRUMENTS AFFECTING TITLED LANDS UNDER ACT. NO.
3344 INEFFECTIVE AGAINST THIRD PERSONS

> Registration of instruments must be done in the proper registry in order to bind the land

> Where property registered under the Torrens system is registered not under the Property
Registration Decree but under Act 3344, the sale is considered not registered and effective for
purposes of Article 1544 of the CC on double sales

> A party who registered the sale of land under the PRD had a better right opposed to another who
had registered a deed of final conveyance under Act No. 3344—priority in time principle wasn’t
applied because the land was already covered by the Torrens system at the time the conveyance
was registered under the Act.

UNDER ACT NO. 3344, REGISTRATION OF INSTRUMENTS AFFECTING

UNREGISTERED LANDS IS “WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO A THIRD PARTY WITH A
BETTER RIGHT”;

- This means that the mere registration of a sale in one’s favor does not give him any right
over the land if the vendor was not anymore the owner of the land having previously sold the same
to somebody else even if the earlier sale was unrecorded.

APPLIED TO DOUBLE SALES

Registration of the second buyer under Act 3344, providing for the registration of all instruments
on land neither covered by the Spanish Mortgage Law nor the Torrens System (Act 496), cannot
improve the standing of a party since Act 3344 itself expresses that registration thereunder would
not prejudice prior rights in good faith (see Carumba vs. Court of Appeals, 31 SCRA 558).

Registration, however, by the first buyer under Act 3344 can have the effect of constructive notice
to the second buyer that can defeat his right as such buyer in good faith (see Arts. 708-709, Civil
Code; see also Revilla vs. Galindez, 107 Phil. 480; Taguba vs. Peralta, 132 SCRA 700).

Art. 1544 has been held to be inapplicable to execution sales of unregistered land, since the
purchaser merely steps into the shoes of the debtor and acquires the latter’s interest as of the time
the property is sold. (Carumba vs. Court of Appeals, 31 SCRA 558; see also Fabian vs. Smith,
Bell & Co., 8 Phil. 496), (Remalante vs. Tibe, 158 SCRA 138; Sps. Noel & Julie Abrigo vs. De
Vera, G. R. No. 154409, June 21, 2004).
 REGISTRATION OF CHATTEL MORTGAGES

Section 114. Recording of chattel mortgages. A chattel mortgage shall be recorded

in the office of the Register of Deeds of the province or city where the mortgagor
resides as well as where the property is situated or ordinarily kept.

Art. 2140. By a chattel mortgage, personal property is recorded in the Chattel

Mortgage Register as a security for the performance of an obligation. If the movable,
instead of being recorded, is delivered to the creditor or a third person, the contract is
a pledge and not a chattel mortgage. (n)

CHATTEL MORTGAGE is governed by Act No. 1508 otherwise known as The Chattel
Mortgage Law and the Civil Code.

Contract by virtue of which personal property is recorded in the Chattel Mortgage Register as a
security for the performance of an obligation.

CHARACTERISTICS
1. Accessory contract
2. Formal contract

REGISTRATION

- Registration shall be done in the Register of Deeds where the mortgagor resides and
when the property is situated somewhere else, it needs to be registered also in the Register of
Deeds of the area where the property is situated.

- Chattel mortgage would not be valid and binding as against third persons absent any registration.
- The registration of a chattel mortgage is an effective and binding notice to other creditors of its
existence and creates a real right or lien that follows the property wherever it may be.

FUNCTION OF THE REGISTRY OF DEEDS

- The duties of the Registry of Deeds in respect to the registration of chattel mortgages are
purely ministerial in character.

- No power, judicial or quasi-judicial, to determine nature of the property whether it is real

or personal, which is the subject of the mortgage.

- Should accept the qualification of the property adapted by the person who presents the
instrument for registration and should place the instrument on record, upon payment of proper fee.

MORTAGE OF A MOTOR VEHICLE

- To affect third persons it should also be recorded in the Land Transportation Office (LTO) aside
from registration in the Chattel Mortgage Registry. [Section 5(e) of the Revised Motor Vehicles
Law].

- The failure of the mortgagee to report the mortgage executed in his favor has the effect of making
said mortgage ineffective against a purchaser in good faith who registers his purchase in the LTO.
 CONSULTAS

Section 117. Procedure. When the Register of Deeds is in doubt with regard to the
proper step to be taken or memorandum to be made in pursuance of any deed,
mortgage or other instrument presented to him for registration, or where any party
in interest does not agree with the action taken by the Register of Deeds with
reference to any such instrument, the question shall be submitted to the
Commissioner of Land Registration by the Register of Deeds, or by the party in
interest thru the Register of Deeds.

Where the instrument is denied registration, the Register of Deeds shall notify the
interested party in writing, setting forth the defects of the instrument or legal
grounds relied upon, and advising him that if he is not agreeable to such ruling, he
may, without withdrawing the documents from the Registry, elevate the matter by
consulta within five days from receipt of notice of the denial of registration to the
Commissioner of Land Registration.

The Register of Deeds shall make a memorandum of the pending consulta on the
certificate of title which shall be canceled motu proprio by the Register of Deeds
after final resolution or decision thereof, or before resolution, if withdrawn by
petitioner.

The Commissioner of Land Registration, considering the consulta and the records
certified to him after notice to the parties and hearing, shall enter an order
prescribing the step to be taken or memorandum to be made. His resolution or ruling
in consultas shall be conclusive and binding upon all Registers of Deeds, provided,
that the party in interest who disagrees with the final resolution, ruling or order of
the Commissioner relative to consultas may appeal to the Court of Appeals within
the period and in manner provided in Republic Act No. 5434.

DOUBTFUL QUESTIONS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE LRA ADMINISTRATOR

FOR RESOLUTION

➢ Register is precluded from exercising his personal judgment and discretion when
confronted with the problem whether to register a deed or instrument on the ground that it
is invalid.

➢ Whether the document is invalid, frivolous or intended to harass, is not the duty of the
Register of Deeds to decide, but a court of competent jurisdiction.

➢ The duty of the Register of Deeds, when in doubt as to the proper action to the proper
action to be taken on any instrument presented to him for registration is to elevate the
matter to the LRA Administrator for resolution via consulta.

➢ The LRA Administrator, who shall, after notice and hearing, enter an order prescribing the
step to be taken or memorandum to be made on the doubtful question which shall be
conclusive and binding upon

➢ The proper remedy available to a party who does not agree with the action taken by the
LRA Administrator is to appeal to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 of the Rules of
Court.
GROUNDS FOR CONSULTA:

(1) Doubt on the part of the RD on what to do;

(2) A party does not agree with the action taken by the RD;

WHEN CONSULTA IS MADE:

The RD shall make a memorandum of the pending consulta on the certificate of title which shall
be cancelled motu proprio:

(a) upon final resolution of the case by the LRA Administrator; or

(b) if the consulta is withdrawn by the petitioner before such resolution.

COLLATERAL ATTACK

Section 48 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 provides:

Section 48. Certificate not subject to collateral attack. – A certificate of title shall
not be subject to collateral attack. It cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled
except in a direct proceeding in accordance with law.

A Torrens title cannot be attacked collaterally, and the issue on its validity can be raised
only in an action expressly instituted for that purpose.

A COLLATERAL ATTACK is made when, in another action to obtain a different relief,

the certificate of title is assailed as an incident in said action.

An example of a collateral attack is when one owns a piece of property registered in his
name and someone is occupying the property. The owner then files for ejectment and the squatter
argues that he would notvacate as the title is not valid. He is raising it as a defense and is not
allowed by law for being a collateral attack.

An example of a direct attack Direct attack is that when there is a title, one would file for
cancellation of the title for being null and void.

In the case entitled SORIENTE ET AL. VS. THE ESTATE OF THE LATE
ARSENIO E. CONCEPCION (G.R. No. 160239, November 25, 2009), the Supreme
Court, through Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta stated:

“In this case, the trial court found that respondent owns the property on the basis of
Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12892, which was ‘issued in the name of Arsenio E.
Concepcion, x x x married to Nenita L. Songco.’ It is settled rule that the person
who has a Torrens Title over a piece of land is entitled to possession thereof.
Hence, as the registered owner of the subject property, respondent is preferred
to possess it.

The validity of respondent’s certificate of title cannot be attacked by petitioner in

this case for ejectment. Under Section 48 of PD 1529, a certificate of title shall not
be subject to collateral attack. It cannot be altered, modified or canceled, except in a
direct proceeding for that purpose in accordance with law. The issue of the validity
of the title of the respondents can only be assailed in an action expressly instituted
for that purpose. Whether the petitioner has the right to claim ownership over the
property is beyond the power of the trial court to determine in an action for unlawful
detainer.
PASIÑO vs. MONTERROYO
G.R. No. 159494
July 31, 2008

A Counterclaim is Not a Collateral Attack on the Title

It is already settled that a counterclaim is considered an original complaint and as such,

the attack on the title in a case originally for recovery of possession cannot be
considered as a collateral attack on the title. Development Bank of the Philippines v.
Court of Appeals [387 Phil. 283 (2000)]. is similar to the case before us insofar as
petitioner in that case filed an action for recovery of possession against respondent
who, in turn, filed a counterclaim claiming ownership of the land. In that case, the
Court ruled:

Nor is there any obstacle to the determination of the validity of TCT No. 10101. It is
true that the indefeasibility of torrens title cannot be collaterally attacked. In the instant
case, the original complaint is for recovery of possession filed by petitioner against
private respondent, not an original action filed by the latter to question the validity of
TCT No. 10101 on which petitioner bases its right. To rule on the issue of validity in
a case for recovery of possession is tantamount to a collateral attack. However, it
should not [b]e overlooked that private respondent filed a counterclaim against
petitioner, claiming ownership over the land and seeking damages. Hence, we could
rule on the question of the validity of TCT No. 10101 for the counterclaim can be
considered a direct attack on the same. ‘A counterclaim is considered a complaint, only
this time, it is the original defendant who becomes the plaintiff... It stands on the same
footing and is to be tested by the same rules as if it were an independent action.’ x x x.