ELISA D. GABRIEL, petitioner appellee, vs. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF RIZAL, respondent
JUANITA R. DOMINGO, oppositor-appeliant.
G.R.No. L-17956 September 30, 1963
PAREDES, J.:
FACTS
Petitioner Elisa. D. Gabriel, filed with the register of deeds of Manila, and adverse ciaim, against
the petitioners registered in the name of oppositor-appeliant, Juanita R. Domingo, her sister. AS
grounds for The adverse claim, petitioner alleges notwithstanding the registration of the
foregoing properties in the name of Juanita the same properties have been included in the
amended inventory of the estate of the late Antonia Reyes, filed by Elisa Domingo Gabriel, As
they are in fact properties acquired by the Deceased during her lifetime. The registration of the
titles of these properties, shouldnave been in the name of Said Antonia but due to the
commission of fraud and deceit, By said Juanita Domingo, Who was then living in the same
house with the deceased, all the titles of the above stated properties were registered instead in
hor name does depriving here in adverse claimant who is likewise an heir of Antonia Reyes of
hor lawful right, interests and participation over said property
A similar notice of adverse claim was presented by petitioners with the Registry of Deeds of
Rizal, on the properties registered in the name of Juanita Domingo located in Rizal province,
Anchoring that the subject property are included in the amended inventory of the estate of their
late mother Antonia Reyes Domingo, who is the true owner of said properties, and considering
that the registration in the name of Juanita Domingo were only made fraudulently, does
depriving here in adverse claimant over lawful rights, interest and participation over said
properties
Domingo opposed, claiming that the adverse claim was instituted for harassment, had no legal
basis in such a position where do |rreparable Loss to het
The register of deeds of Rizal denied the registration of the notice of adverse claim stating that
such has been found to be legally defective or otherwise nat sufficient in law and is therefore
denied on ground that where there are other provisions of remedies under this act, The affidavit
of adverse claim is not applicable
Elisa Gabriolle a field above denial to the iand registration commission. The LRC citing section
710 of act no. 496 stated that the two notices of adverse claim fled By both registries
substantially comply with the above legal requirements. And under paragraph 5 of the LRC
Circular No. 2, dated July 10. 1954, where the docurnent sought to be registered is sufficient in
law and drawn up in accordance with existing requirements, it, becomes incumbent upon the
Register of Deeds to perform his ministerial duty without unnecessary delay. The registration of
an invalid adverse claim will not do as much harm as the non-registration of a valid one The
notation of an adverse claim, like that of lis pendens, does not create non-existent right or lien
‘and only means that a person who chases or contracts on the property in dispute does so
subject to the result or outcome of the dispute. In. view of the foregoing tacts and
Considerations, the LRC is of the opinion, and so holds, that the notices of verse claim filed by
Elisa D. Gabriel with the Registries of Manila and Rizal are registrableISSUE:
Whether or not the adverse claims are registrable.
RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court held that in addition to the well-taken disquisitions of the L.R.C., it
should be observed that section 110 of Act No. 498, which is the legal provision applicable to
the case. is divided into two parts: the first refers to the duty of the party who claims any part or
interest in registered land adverse to the registered owner, subsequent to the date of the
original registration; and the requirements to be complied with in order that such statement shell
been titled to registration as an adverse claim, thus showing the ministerial function of the
Register of Deeds, when no defect is found on the face of such instrument and the second
applies only when, after registration of the adverse claim, a party files an appropriate petition
with a competent court which shall grant a speedy hearing upon the question of the validity of
such adverse claim, and to enter a decree, as justice and equity require andin this hearing, the
competent court shall resolve whether the adverse claim is frivolous or vexatious, which shall
serve as the basis in taxing the costs.
In the instant case, the first part was already acted upon by the LPC. which resolved in favor of
the registrabllity of the two adverse claims and this part should have been considered as closed
What is left, is the determination of the validity of the adverse claims by competent court, after
the filing of the corresponding petition for hearing, which the appaliant had not dono.