Lands v. Court Of Appeals

GUERRERO, J.:

Petition for Review on certiorari pursuant to Rule 45, Rules of Court, in relation to Republic Act 5440 and/or a Special Civil Action of certiorari under Section 1, Rule 65, Rules of Court, petitioner claiming no appeal nor any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Petitioner prays this Court to reverse the decision dated October 1, 1976 of respondent Court of Appeals1 in CA-G.R. No. 56729-R entitled "Demetria Sta. Maria Vda.

de Bernal, petitioner-appellant, versus Director of Lands, Pedro de la Peña Leodegario R. Alba, Jr., Aurora R. Favila, Democrito R. Favila, Eufracia R. Favila and Angel Cruz, oppositors-appellants" Re: Petition for Reconstitution of Original Certificate of Title No. T-42449, Rizal Registry of Deeds and in lieu thereof to dismiss the petition for reconstitution of title, to declare null and void the Resolution dated November 11, 1976 denying petitioner's Motion for a New period or Extension of Time to File a Motion for Reconsideration and further denying the Motion to Admit Motion for Reconsideration. In a petition dated and filed June 6, 1970 in the Court of First Instance of Rizal, private respondent Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal sought the reconstitution of the original of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 of the Registry of deeds of Rizal covering two (2) parcels of land located in Barrio San Dionisio, Municipality of Parañaque, Province of Rizal (now the Municipality of Muntinlupa, Province of Rizal) containing an aggregate area of 143.5062 hectares, more or less. Attached to the petition are the photostat copy of the supposed owner's copy of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79, the plan of the property together with the technical description thereof, approved by the Chief of the Survey Division of the Bureau of Lands.

The petition for reconstitution was set for hearing on November 28, 1970 at 8:30 A.M. after due publication of the required notice was made. The required notice of hearing was duly published in two successive issues of the Official Gazette, Vol. 66, No. 31, pp. 7226-7227, Aug.

3, 1970, and Vol. 66, No. 32, p. 7493, Aug.

10, 1970, as follows: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT BRANCH XIII Petition for Reconstitution of TCT No. 12,,T-79, Land Records of Rizal DEMETRIA STA. MARIA VDA. DE BERNAL, Petitioner NOTICE OF HEARING In her verified petition, Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal prays for the reconstitution of TCT No. 12/T-79 covering Lots I and 3 of plan II-4374 situated in San Dionisio, Paranaque (now Muntinlupa) Rizal with an area of 1,866,979 square meters registered in her name. She alleges, among others, that the original of the aforesaid title in the custody and possession of the Registry of Deeds of Rizal was either lost or destroyed during the last war and diligent efforts to locate the same proved futile; that the owner's copy of said certificate of title, however, had been preserved by petitioner; that her owner's duplicate of TCT No. 12;'T-29 has never been encumbered and that the technical descriptions of said lots are as follows: Lot 1, II-4374 A parcel of land (Lot 1 of plan 11-4374, LRC Record No. situated in the Barrio of San Dionisio, Municipality of Paranaque (now Muntinlupa), Province of Rizal.

Bounded on the E and N., along lines 1-2-3-4-5 by Public Lands; on the NW along lines 5-6-7-89 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 2 of plan 11-4374) on the W and S along lines 9-10-11 by public lands; on the SE SW., and SE along lines 11-12-13-14-15 by property of Olimpia B.

Santamaria (Lot 3 of plan II-4374); on the SE SW., along lines 15-16- 1 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 4 of plan 11-4374). Containing an area of seven hundred seventeen thousand five hundred twenty-three (717,523) square meters. Lot 3, II-4374 A parcel of land (Lot 3 of plan 11-4374, LRC Record No. -), situated in the Barrio of San Dionisio, Municipality of Paranaque, Province of Rizal.

Bounded on the NW and NE., along lines 1-2-3-4 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 4 of plan 11-4374); on the NW NE., and NW along lines 4-5-6-7-8 by property of Olimpia B. Sta. Maria (Lot I of plan 11-4374); and on the NW SW., SE and E along lines 9- 10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-1 by Public Land. Containing an area of seven hundred seventeen thousand five hundred thirty-nine square meters (717,539).

Wherefore, notice is hereby given that said petition will be heard before this Court at Pasig, Rizal on November 28, 1970 at 8:30 A.M. at which place, date and hour aforesaid, all interested persons are hereby cited to appear and show cause, if any they have. why said petition should not be granted. Let this notice be published once a week for 3 consecutive weeks in the "Daily Mirror, "

as well as twice in successive issues of the "Official Gazette." Likewise, copies of this notice must be posted in the bulletin board of the Provincial Capitol of Rizal Municipal Building of Muntinlupa, Rizal and on Lot 1 and 3 before the hearing. Furthermore, let copies of this notice be sent by registered mail to Manuela Aquial Olimpia B. Sta Maria, The Director of Lands, the land Registration Commissioner, the Register of Deeds of Rizal the Provincial Fiscal of Rizal and the Office of the Solicitor General.

Witness the Hon. Pedro A. Revilla, Judge of this Court, this 8th day of July, 1970 at Pasig, Rizal. (Sgd.) MAXIMO C. CONTRERAS Branch Clerk of Court Before the hearing of the case on its merits, however, the Court required the Registry of Deeds to submit his report regarding the status of Certificate of Title No. 12/'T-79, the original of which was sought to be reconstituted. In his report, Atty. Jose D. Santos, the Register of Deeds, indicated that Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/'T-79 is not filed in Registry Book No. T79; that Certificate of Title No. 12 according to the records is under Registration Book No. T-1 issued in the name of Edwin Warnes and that said title refers to a property situated in Pasay City; that said Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12 was already cancelled by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 19, Book I I of the Registry of Deeds of Rizal.

The report also stated that Registration Book No. T- 79 embraces Transfer Certificates of 'title with numbers of five (5) digits; and that there are no available records of the Registry of Deeds which might indicate whether or not there is such Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 in the name of petitioner (Demetria Sta. Maria Vda. de Bernal).

(See Decision, CFI, pp. 67-68, Record on Appeal). In view of the report of the Register of Deeds of Rizal cited above, private respondent Demetria Sta. Maria Vda.

de Bernal was allowed by the Court on November 12. 1970 to file an amended petition wherein the number of her Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 was changed to Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 of the Registry of Deeds of Rizal The amended petition reads as follows: (CAPTION & TITLE OMITTED) Petitioner, thru counsel, respectfully alleges: 1. - That petitioner is of legal age, widow, Filipino citizen, and resident of and with postal address at 102 Sixto Antonio St., Bo.

Rosario, Paranaque, Rizal; 2. - That she is the owner of certain parcels of land located at Barrio San Dionisio, Municipality of Paranaque, before, now Muntinlupa, Province of Rizal as evidenced by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 of the Land Records of Rizal, which property is described as follows: Lot III-4374 A parcel of land (Lot I of plan II-4374 LRC Record No.

situated in the Barrio of San Dionisio, Municipality of Paranaque, (now Muntinlupa), Province of Rizal. Bounded on the E and N., along lines 1-2-3-4-5 by Public Land; on the NW along lines 5-6-7-8-9 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 2 of plan 11-4374); on the W and S along lines 9-10-11 by Public Land; on the SE SW., and SE along lines 11-12-13-14-15 by property of Olimpia B. Santamaria (Lot 3 of plan II-4374); on the SE SW., along lines 15-16-1 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 4 of plan II-4374). Containing an area of SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY THREE (717,523 SQUARE METERS.

Lot 3, II-4374 A parcel of land (Lot 3 of plan II-4374, LRC Record No. situated in the Barrio of San Dionisio, Municipality of Paranaque, Province of Rizal. Bounded on the NW and NE., along lines 1-2-3-4 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 4 of plan II-4374); on the NW NE., and NW along lines 4- 5-6-7-8 by property of Olimpia B. Santamaria Lot 1 of plan 11-4374), and on the NW SW., and SE along lines 9-10- 11-12-13-14-14-16-17-1 by Public Lands. Containing an area of SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY NINE (717,539) SQUARE METERS.

3. - That on the occasion of the military operations during the last world war, the original of the above-mentioned Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 in the Office of the Register of Deeds was either lost or destroyed and despite diligent efforts exerted, proved to no avail; however, the Owner's Duplicate of said Transfer Certificate of Title had been preserved by the herein petitioner and could be the basis of this petition; 4. - That the boundary owners of the property above- described are as follows: Manuela Aquial Olimpia B. Sta.

Maria and Public Land, with known residence at Paranaque, Rizal; 5. - That the aforesaid Transfer Certificate of Title does not appear to have been encumbered except to those persons who might in the future appear to have interest during the pendency of this petition; 6. - That the following documents are hereto attached as an integral part hereof, to wit: Four (4) photostat copies of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 in the name of Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal. Four (4) copies in white print of plan II-4374, which is a survey approved on July 25, 1911.

Four (4) copies of the Technical Description of Lots 1 and 3 of plan 11-4374. Other documents which may be required will be submitted during the proceedings.) WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that after due notice and hearing, an order be issued to the Register of Deeds of the Province of Rizal to reconstitute the Original Copy of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 in the name of the herein petitioner; that petitioner be granted such other relief which may be just and equitable in the premises. Manila, for Pasig, Rizal, Philippines, Nov.

12, 1970. (Sgd) CESAREO A. FABRICANTE Counsel for the Petitioner Suite 413 Shurdut Bldg. Intramuros, Manila (Verification by Petitioner Omitted) The above amended petition was admitted by the Court in its Order of December 7, 1970 and it directed the Publication of Notice in the following order: Considering the motion for permission to amend petition, the Court resolves to grant the same provided all the requisites for publication and posting of notices be complied with it appearing that the amendment is quite substantial in nature.

IN VIEW THEREOF, the amended petition dated November 12, 1970 attached to the motion is hereby admitted; and the Branch Clerk of this Court is directed to cause the publication of the notice once a week for three consecutive weeks in the Daily Mirror as well as twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette; and to post the same notices in the bulletin board of the Provincial Capitol Building; Municipal Building of Muntinlupa; and lots 1 and 3; and to serve copies of the same by registered mail to the alleged boundary owners, namely. Manuela Aquial Olimpia B. Sta.

Maria, Director of Lands, Director of Forestry, Atty. Casiano P. Laquihon, and Atty. Josefina Nepomuceno. SO ORDERED. Pasig, Rizal, December 7, 1970.

(Sgd) PEDRO A. REVILLA Judge Pursuant to the Order of the Court quoted above, the Deputy Clerk of Court ordered the following Notice published: In her verified petition, Demetria Sta. Maria Vda. de Bernal prays for the reconstitution of TCT No. 42449 covering Lots 1 and 3 of plan 11-4374 situated in San Dionisio, Paranaque now Muntinlupa 1 Rizal with an area of 1,866,979 square meters registered in her name.

She alleges, among other things, that the original of the aforesaid title in the custody and possession of the Registry of Deeds of Rizal was either lost or destroyed during the last war and diligent efforts to locate the same proved futile; that the owner's duplicate copy of said certificate of title however, had been preserved by petitioner: that her owner s duplicate of TCT No. 42449 has never been encumbered and that the technical descriptions of said lots are as follows: Lot 1, II-4374 A parcel of land (lot 1 of plan 11-4374, LRC Record No. situated in the Barrio of San Dionisio, Municipality of Paranaque (now Muntinlupa), Province of Rizal. Bounded on the E and N., along lines 1-2-3-4-5 by Public Land; on the NW along lines 5-6-7-8-9 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 2 of plan II-4374) of the W anti S along lines 9- 10-11 by public land; on the SE SW., and SE along lines 11-12-13-14-15 by property of Olimpia B. Santamaria (Lot 3 ,4 plan II-4374); on the SE and SW., along lines 15-16-1 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 4 of plan 11-4374).

Containing an area of SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY THREE (717,523 SQUARE METERS. Lot 3, II-4374 A parcel of land (Lot 3 of plan II-4374, LRC Record No. -), situated in the Barrio of San Dionisio, Municipality of Paranaque, Province of Rizal. Bounded on the NE., and NW along lines 1-2-3-4 by property of Manuela Aquial (Lot 4 of plan 11-4374); on the NW '., NE., and NW along lines 4-5-6-7-8 by property of Olimpia B. Sta.

Maria (Lot 1 of plan 11-4374); and on the NW SW., SE and E along lines 0- 10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-1 by Public Land. Containing an area of SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY NINE (717,539) SQUARE METERS. WHEREFORE, notice is hereby given that said petition will be heard before this court at Pasig, Rizal on March 22, 1971 at 8:30 A.M. at which place, date and hour aforesaid, all interested persons are hereby cited to appear and show cause, if any they have why said petition should not be granted.

Let this notice be published once a week for 3 consecutive weeks in the "Daily Mirror", as well as twice in successive issues of the "Official Gazette." Likewise, copies of this notice must be posted in the bulletin board of the Provincial Capitol of Rizal, and on Lots 1 and 3 before the hearing. WITNESS the Hon. Pedro A. Revilla, Judge of this Court, this 7th day of December, 1970 at Pasig, Rizal.

(Sgd.) MAXIMO C. CONTRERAS Branch Clerk of Court On November 9, 1970, oppositors Pedro de la Pena and Leodegario R. Alba, Jr. filed an opposition which they amended on April 12, 1971 by adopting the opposition of the Director of Lands, but was later withdrawn on June 15, 1973, approved by the Court on January 23, 1974. On June 20, 1970, Angel Cruz also filed an opposition alleging: 1. - That he specifically denies the allegations of paragraphs 1 to 6 the truth of the matter being that below stated as: a.

That petitioner is not a widow, she being the spouse of herein Oppositor Angel Cruz; b. That the Certificate of Title mentioned in the petition is fake together with all evidences mentioned in said petition; c. That the oppositor is the true owner of the parcel of land whose certificate of title is sought to be reconstituted.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the petition be dismissed. Quezon City for Pasig, Rizal, December 20, 1970.

Oppositor Cruz, however, never appeared at the hearing and abandoned his opposition. Oppositors Aurora Favila et al. also filed an opposition which was amended on April 1, 1971 but after Demetria Sta. Maria Vda.

de Bernal presented part of her evidence, said oppositors abandoned their opposition and never appeared at subsequent hearings. On March 16, 1971, the Director of Lands filed the opposition in behalf of the government, which was adopted as the Opposition also to the Amended Petition for Reconstitution. The Opposition alleges: 1.

- That Demetria Sta. Maria Vda, de Bernal of Rosario, Pasig, Rizal seeks the reconstitution of the Original Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 or 42449, covering two (2) parcels of land situated in Barrio San Dionisio, Paranaque, Rizal, and which is shown in Plan II-4374, allegedly approved on July 25, 1911 by the Director of Lands and described in the Technical Descriptions also allegedly issued by the Surveys Division, Bureau of Lands under Accession No. 195551, and containing an area of 143.5062 hectares, more or less and which said plan and technical descriptions are attached to the petition; 2. - That by reconstituting the Original Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79, now 42449 in the name of the Petitioner using the said Owner's Transfer Certificate of Title as the basic source, is not feasible, because: (A) The genuineness and authenticity of the Owner's duplicate copy of the title is seriously of doubtful origin.

(B) That the said Transfer Certificate of Title was issued by the Registry of Deeds of the City of Manila and not by the Registry of Deeds of Rizal Province, who is authorized by law to issue the same and who at the time of the issuance was holding his Office at Pasig, Rizal; (C) That the basic Original Certificate of Title No. 12 which was cancelled by the alleged Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79, was registered in the Registry of Deeds of Rizal Province in the name of Edwin Warnes and Company, and the property is situated in Pasay City, contrary to the statements in the said Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12-T- 79 of petitioner; (D) That the said Transfer Certificate of Title was issued under Judicial Form No. 140-D, GLRO Form No. 68-D and not the revised Judicial Form No. 41, GLRO Form No. 109, which was being used ever since 1931, hence, said title is patently irregular, if not spurious; (E) That the Owner's Duplicate Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 does not reflect the NUMBER of the SALES PATENT upon which the Original Certificate of Title was derived from; (F) That the Bureau of Lands during the year 1941-1944 (Japanese Occupation) had only an skeleton force at work and did not issue patents or patent-titles; (G) That Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12,T-79 in the name of the petitioner does not contain the imprint of the Official Seal of the Registry of Deeds of the City of Manila where the same was issued; (H) That Book No. T-79 of the Registry of Deeds of Rizal Province contains only Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 19453 to 19700, Series of 1931 and does not show that Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 was duly registered therein; (I) That the Owner's Duplicate transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 is partially damaged, so much so that some of the bearings and distances are missing or could not be read; 3.

- That Plan 11-4374 in the name of the petitioner and the Technical Descriptions could not be the basis for the reconstitution of the Original Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 nay 42449 on the following grounds: (A) That the Original Plan 11-4374 is not subsisting in the files and records of the Bureau of lands, hence petitioner's plan cannot be considered official reproduction copy of the same; (B) That there is no basis for the issuance of the Technical Descriptions covering Lots Nos. 1 and 3, Plan 114374; (C) That the Director of lands who supposedly approved plan 11-4374 on July 25, 191 1, is not the same Director of Lands during the same period; (D) That the public official who signed the controverted Technical Descriptions was not duly authorized to sign and issue the same; (E) That the Accession No. 195551, appearing in the Technical Descriptions of Lots Nos. I and 3 of plan 11-4374 is fake, because it pertains to plan 11-4005, the land being the property of the Municipality of Liloan Island of Pandan, Province of Leyte, containing an area of 3838 square meters, surveyed on December 19, 1910 and approved on February 7, 1911; obviously Plan 11-4374 is also a fake; and (F) That plan 11-4374 as described in the alleged Technical Descriptions when projected in cadastral maps falls outside Paranaque Cadastre, Paranaque, Rizal.

4. - That the aggregate areas of Lots Nos. 1 and 3, Plan 11- 4374 is 143.5062 hectares and it is not improbable that it will encroach other titled properties including roads, public highways and even the Municipal Hall of Muntinlupa, Rizal; hence a relocation survey is necessary to establish the metes and bounds of the controverted lands and its relative position in the locality; 5. - That as alleged by the petitioner's counsel in his "Motion for Permission to Amend Petition"

dated November 12, 1970, that the Owner's Duplicate Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 was tampered and that the real number appearing on the same is 42449, only creates the impression that both alleged titles are fake, together with the plan and technical descriptions, much more so that the said Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 is not attached and made part of the petition in the expedients 6. - That the petition for reconstitution of the Original Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 nay 42449 is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 3, Republic Act No. 26. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that the Petition to Reconstitute Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T-79 now 42449, be denied with costs against the petitioner.

Manila, for Pasig, Rizal, March 16, 1971. On September 11, 1972, Demetria Sta. Maria Vda.

de Bernal prayed the Court for the withdrawal of the photostat' copy of TCT No. 12/T-79 and copies of the Daily Mirror together with the affidavit of publication found on pages 22-25 inclusive of the expediente, for having become irrelevant, immaterial and of no further use in the proceedings. In a Manifestation dated September 11, 1972, counsel for Demetria Sta. Maria Vda.

de Bernal manifested that at the time of the filing of the petition for reconstitution of her duplicate Owner's Certificate of Title No. 42449 of the land records of Rizal Province, said certificate was considered lost and its whereabouts, could not be ascertained; that said certificate has been finally recovered recently and is now in her possession; that according to information furnished her by the Register of Deeds Office of Rizal after some query, the original of petitioner's duplicate TCT No. 42449 is among those missing in the Book of Certificates of Titles turned over by the Register of Deeds of Manila to the Register of Deeds of Rizal. Counsel thereupon prayed that the petition be treated as one for the reconstitution of petitioner's Original Certificate of Title No. 42449. The Court having ordered on November 16, 1972 the examination of the genuineness of the signature of Mariano Villanueva, Register of Deeds of Manila, in the Owner's duplicate copy of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 of petitioner by the National Bureau of Investigation, the NBI submitted on November 24, 1972 to the court "Questioned Documents Report No. 166-1172,"

finding that the signature of Mariano Villanueva appearing in TCT No. 42449 of petitioner is genuine. On November 19, 1973, the Court issued its Order denying reconstitution of petitioner's Original Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449.

The Court, dwelling on the change in the number of Demetria Sta. Maria Vda. de Bernal's Certificate of Title from No. 12/T-79 to TCT No. 42449, said: "During the hearing of this case, petitioner Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal explained the circumstances leading to the erroneous title sought to be reconstituted under her original petition. She testified that she and her husband, Angel Cruz, were separated.

During the time that they were living together, she entrusted to her husband the owner's copy of the title covering this property. Sometime after their separation, she demanded from her estranged husband the owner's copy of her title over the property allegedly owned by her at San Dionisio, Paranaque, Rizal (now Muntinlupa). She did not notice that the title delivered to her by her alleged husband was fake.

As a matter of fact, she caused a photostat copy thereof to be attached to the original petition. After discovering that the title given to her by her husband is spurious, she again demanded from her husband the delivery of the title which she had entrusted to him. After much effort, she was able to retrieve from her husband Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 which is now the subject of her amended petition.

Petitioner is now sure that this is the same title which she had left in the custody of her erstwhile husband Angel Cruz. A comparison of the technical descriptions appearing in the original title No. 12/T-79 and Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 shows that the parcels of land described in both titles are exactly the same. "

And analyzing the evidence for Demetria Sta. Maria Vda. de Bernal, the Court continued: "The evidence of the petitioner tended to show that the property embraced by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T- 42449, was originally covered by a sales patent, Original Certificate of Title No. 42392 in the name of Olimpia Sta.

Maria, the mother of the present petitioner; that the said property was sold to petitioner for the sum of P10,000.00 during the Japanese time and that in consequence of said sale, Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-42449 was issued in her name by the Register of Deeds of Manila since the location of the property involved was comprised within the Greater Manila area during the Japanese Occupation; it was also testified to that the copy of the deed of sale was lost during the fire which occurred in Pasig during the occupation where petitioner was then residing-, petitioner also claimed that she and her mother were and are presently in possession of the property which is planted to palay and fruitbearing trees; that Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 was delivered to the Register of Deeds of Rizal Province by the Register of Deeds of Manila (Exhibits J, J-1, J-2 and K) and that this original title was allegedly lost in the office of the Register of Deeds of Rizal (Exhibits D and D-1).

The signature of Mr. Mariano Villanueva appearing at the bottom of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 (Exhibit "C") was attested by an NBI document examiner, Atty. Narciso Pena, former Register of Deeds of the City of Manila and Mr. Ricardo Obispo, an old timer in the office of the Registry of Deeds of Manila to be the authentic signature of Mr. Mariano Villanueva who was the Register of Deeds of Manila during the occupation. The petitioner sought to establish the correctness of the technical descriptions appearing in Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-42449 from the minutes of the reading of the microfilm of the plan of the property at the Bureau of Lands on November 25, 1972 signed by Engineer Modesto Eloriaga Chief, Reproduction Section of the Bureau of Lands, Atty. Pedro Flores for the Director of Lands, and Atty. Fortunato de Leon, counsel for the petitioner (Exhibits G, G 1, G-2 and N).

Offered in evidence also by the petitioner were the tax declarations of the property under the name of the petitioner together with tax receipts evidencing payment of the same (Exhibits L, L-1, M, M-1 and M-2 Mr. Oscar T. Eusebio in his capacity as Register of Deeds of Rizal vigorously opposed the petitioner and in the course of his testimony, he Identified his written report in pursuance to an order of this court. He testified that according to their records Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449, Book T-214 (pre-war records) was issued in the name of Esmeralda Pabustan covering a property located at Pasay City; that this certificate of title was forwarded to the Register of Deeds of Manila sometime on September 14, 1943 as evidenced by a receipt signed by Mr. Mariano Villanueva, Register of Deeds of Manila. Eusebio testified that Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449, Book T-489 of post-war vintage existing in their files is under the name of Pilar Paterno covering a property situated in sitio lbayong Malaque Las Pinas Rizal, with an area of 2,450 square meters which was cancelled by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 56515, Book T-559.

In spite of the impressive array of the evidence presented by the petitioner both oral and documentary, there are circumstances in this case which impel the Court to deny the present petition. To begin with, it appears that there are three (3) transfer certificates of title allegedly covering the two (2) lots under consideration viz. (1) Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12/T- 79 in the name of herein petitioner Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal attached to the original petition; (2) Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 which is the subject of the amended petition in this case, also in the name of the petitioner; and (3) Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-76 under the name of petitioner's estranged husband Angel V. Cruz attached to another Reconstitution Case (No. 70) filed by one Jose Polinag alleged attorney-in-fact of Angel V. Cruz, estranged husband of petitioner Bernal, before Branch XXV of this Court and of which case this Court has taken judicial notice of. In Reconstitution Case No. 70, it is noted that the Presiding Judge of said Court granted the petition of Jose Polinag notwithstanding the opposition and motion to dismiss filed by the herein petitioner Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal. It is apparent, therefore, that if this Court were to grant the present petition, there may be more than one (1) title issued under different names for the same lots.

While Demetria Sta. Maria Vda. de Bernal claims that Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-76 is fake, her husband Angel V. Cruz who failed an opposition in the case at bar although he did not pursue the same under this proceeding, alleged that Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 sought to be reconstituted by his wife Bernal is also fake.

In the instant case, Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 in the name of the petitioner is sought to be reconstituted by petitioner Bernal. There is not a scintilla of evidence presented by the petitioner to show that this Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 issued during the Japanese time was ever received by the Register of Deeds of Rizal Province. What the records of the Registry of Deeds disclose is that Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 (pre- war records) was issued in the name of Esmeralda Pabustan, covering a property located at Pasay, Rizal Province.

After the war, Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449, Book T-489 was issued in the name of Pilar Paterno on January 6, 1956, covering a property situated in sitio lbayong Malaque Las Pinas Rizal with an area of 7,450 square meters and which was cancelled by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 56515, Book T-559. On the other hand, Certificate of Title No.

42392 from which Transfer Certificate of Title No, 42449 (Exhibit C) of the petitioner appears to have been derived from does not exist in the files of the Register of Deeds of Rizal although there is in the records of the Register of Deeds, Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42392 in the name of Paz Bravo de Perfecto covering a property located at San Felipe Neri, Mandaluyong, Rizal. Among the exhibits presented by the petitioner are Exhibits J, J-1 and J-2 Exhibit J purports to show a list contained in eleven (1 1) photostatic sheets of titles supposedly transmitted by the Register of Deeds of Manila to the Register of Deeds of Rizal Province wherein is listed among the titles supposedly sent to Pasig, Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 and Original Certificate of Title No. 42392. The Court has noted certain glaring irregularities in these exhibits which were not explained during the hearing of this case.

For example, under Volume T-342 where Exhibit J-1, Title No. 42449 is listed, the number of the titles appearing thereunder are all of five (5) digits beginning with the number 4, whereas under Volume T-343 the numbers of the titles listed thereunder are also of five (5) digits but beginning with the number 1. The Court finds it strange if not irregular why an earlier volume should embrace higher numbered titles than a later volume (see page 10 of Exhibit J, last column). A close scrutiny of pages 10 and 11 of Exhibit J will show that the last columns of the list of titles appearing thereon were typed with a different typewriter from that used with respect to the other columns listed on the same pages.

It will be noted that the spacing of the figures shown on page 10 of Exhibit J is narrower than those of the figures appearing in the other columns of said page. On the other hand, the last column on page 11 shows that the figures appearing on the last column are of larger print than the figures of the other columns on the same page. By a strange coincidence or otherwise, both the titles sought to be reconstituted by the petitioner as wen as the alleged mother title thereof are listed in the last columns of pages 10 and 11 of Exhibit J. While almost all of the titles listed in this exhibit does not bear the names of the registered owners, Title No. 42449 shows in handwriting the name of Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal (Exhibit J-1 and after Original Certificate of Title No. 42392 there appears the handwritten name of Olimpia Sta. Maria, the alleged predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner (Exhibits J-1 and J- 2).

There is no testimony in the record to explain who made these intercalations. The person who certified that the eleven photostatic copies constituting Exhibit J are reproductions of the original existing in the files of the Register of Deeds was not presented as a witness. The Court, therefore, cannot attach much weight to these exhibits.

The original of this list contained in Exhibit J was never presented in Court and it has not been shown that the original of this list is not available in the office of the Register of Deeds of Rizal where said Exhibit J is alleged to have been forwarded on April 5, 1949. The certifying employee of the Manila Register of Deeds was not presented to verify whether the list attached to his certification has not been tampered. Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 which is the subject of this reconstitution (Exhibit C) appears to have been signed by Register of Deeds Mr. Mariano Villanueva of Manila for the Register of Deeds of Rizal Province.

This alleged title was supposed to have been signed by the Register of Deeds of Manila on the 19th day of November in the year 1943, when the Municipality of Paranaque where the land covered by the above-described title is located was part of Greater Manila.

The Court finds it rather unusual why the Register of Deeds of Manila should sign the said title for and in behalf of the Register of Deeds of Rizal when the property covered by said title was within the radius of the Greater Manila area. That the Register of Deeds of Manila did not affix his signature in such capacity during the Japanese time is a matter which is capable of verification. Tax Declaration No. 7046, Exhibit L, which purports to have been issued sometime in 1943 does not bear the signature of the Provincial Assessor.

Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 shows on its face that the lots described therein were originally registered on the 29th day of September, 1942 by virtue of a sales patent issued on September 15,1942 under Act 141. Exhibit H which appears to be an official receipt representing payment for real estate taxes corresponding to Tax Declaration No, 7046 is supposed to be in payment of the taxes for the property in question for the period from 1941 to 1946. On the basis of the title relied upon by the petitioner, the original title therefor was issued only on September 29, 1942 and vet petitioner claims by this document, Exhibit H to have paid the taxes corresponding to this property for the year 1941 before her predecessor-in-interest had allegedly acquired the same in 1942.

Tax Declaration No. 15340 (Exhibit L-1) on the other hand Shows that said tax declaration is new and began only in the year 1970. If it not supersede any previous tax declaration. IN VIEW OF ALL THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the Court finds the evidence submitted by the petitioner insufficient to warrant the reconstitution of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 (Exhibit C) and, therefore, hereby denies instant petition.

SO ORDERED. Pasig, Rizal, November 19, 1973. (Sgd.) PEDRO A. REVILLA Judge On September 11, 1973, Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal filed a Motion for Reconsideration and New Trial with supporting affidavit of merits within the reglementary period, based on the following grounds, to wit: "A. - That the order is not supported and is at variance with the evidence and is contrary to law; B. - That petitioner has newly-discovered evidence consisting of material facts discovered after the trial which could not have been discovered even with due diligence at the time, and that such evidence is of such a nature as to alter the result of the case in favor of your petitioner, and are not merely cumulative; C. - That petitioner is a victim of excusable negligence and mistake engendered by oppositors who interposed no objection to various exhibits during their presentation leading her to believe they were already admissible in evidence at their face value without further proof; that oppositors interposed no objection when offered in evidence and petitioner rested her case.

In support of the Motion for Reconsideration and New Trial, counsel for Demetria argued that TCT No. 12/T-79 and TCT No. 42449 are one and the same certificate of title covering the same Identical property of Demetria Sta. Maria Vda. de Bernal; that what is fake and false is merely No. 12/T-79 which was the product of machination of Angel Cruz, the estranged husband of Demetria and oppositor in the case who did not pursue his opposition and instead filed a petition for reconstitution of TCT T-12 before Branch XXV in Reconstitution Case No. 70; that TCT T-76 being reconstituted in Reconstitution Case No. 70 before Branch XXV is definitely a fake title and that it overlaps some 8 hectares of Demetria's property covered by TCT 42449; that TCT No. 42449 issued by the Register of Deeds of Greater Manila was delivered and received by the Register of Deeds of Rizal; that there are many TCT Nos. 42449 is borne by the practice of the office before the war, during the Japanese occupation, and after liberation for the simple reason that each Register of Deeds Office carries separate series from No.

I up so that the same Identical number of TCT may be issued by different Register of Deeds covering different properties in the name of different persons in different provinces. Counsel for Demetria further argued that discussion about TCT No. 12/T-79 is beside the point of issue; that the only issue is whether there is TCT No. 42449 to be reconstituted; that the seeming irregularities noted by the Court are natural consequences of reconstitution records; that the Court committed the error of considering records of Reconstitution No. 70; that the Court's fear that more than one certificate of title for the same property will be issued is without foundation in fact. The alleged newly-discovered evidence which may alter the result of the decision is recited in the affidavit of merit of Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal, thus: 2. - That subsequent to the trial of this case, she discovered the following new evidence, which briefly stated will establish the following facts to wit: that the property supposedly covered by OCT No. 76 involved in the decision of Judge Reynaldo P. Honrado in Reconstitution Case No. 70 is different from her property covered by TCT No. 42449, object of this reconstitution proceedings; (h)ow the fake Number TCT No. 12/T-79 was superimposed through fraudulent series of copying; newly-discovered approved plan of the Land Registration Commission showing petitioner's properties described in TCT No. 42449 has no conflict; reconstitution and plotting by an expert surveyor that the properties covered by TCT No. 42449 is different than that represented in TCT No. 12/T-76 in Reconstitution Case No. 70; and others; Considering the grounds set forth in the Motion for Reconsideration and New Trial and in view of the manifestation of Atty. Pedro Flores of the Bureau of Lands that they have no objection to the motion and there being no objection on the part of the other oppositors, the Court on January 14, 1974, set aside its Order of November 19, 1973 and set the case for reception of additional evidence on the part of Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal on February 21, 1974. Meantime, the Court on March 14, 1974 issued an Order directing the NBI to examine the genuineness of the signature of Jose Pueblo in the receipt Exhibit "J"

for the reason that Jose Pueblo can no longer remember whether or not the signature is his signature (he died in the course of the hearing on new trial) and accordingly, on May 3,1974, the NBI submitted its "Questioned Document Report No. 396-374" finding said signature to be genuine. Hearings were conducted and thereafter, on September 18, 1974, the Court denied reconstitution of Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal's Original Transfer Certificate of Title No. T42449. In its denial order, the Court said: "Fundamentally, the additional evidence presented by petitioner in support of their motion for new trial failed to augment their original proof to warrant the reconstitution of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449.

It merely, clarified certain aspects surrounding the transmittal of various certificates of title from the Register of Deeds of Manila to the Register of Deeds of Rizal in Pasig. There is stin no clear and convincing evidence to establish or to prove that the original of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 in the name of petitioner which is sought to be reconstituted actually existed. The Court still entertains a grave and serious doubt as to the authenticity of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449, Exhibit C, submitted by petitioner to support their stand.

The lists of certificates of title supposedly received by the Register of Deeds of Rizal from the Register of Deeds of Manila on its face appears to be subject to question. Two (2) receipts were produced in Court to show the alleged receipt.

One receipt in the possession of the Register of Deeds of Manila signed by Jose Pueblo, a former employee of the Register of Deeds of Rizal (Exhibit J and another receipt in the possession of the Register of Deeds of Rizal signed by the Register of Deeds himself, Gregorio Velasquez (Exhibits 5, 5-A to 5-G While in the receipt, Exhibit J, there is listed therein a certificate of title with number "42449" which petitioner claims to cover their certificate of title, the receipt in the possession of the Register of Deeds of Rizal does not contain this number. The reliability of the two (2) receipts cannot be assumed in view of this existing variance.

The findings and conclusion of this Court in its order dated November 19, 1973 remain unchanged. The Court still entertains doubt as to the authenticity and genuineness of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 (Exhibit C) which is sought to be reconstituted. FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, the Court is constrained to deny the instant petition and to maintain its order of November 19, 1973.

SO ORDERED. Pasig, Rizal, September 18, 1974. (Sgd.) PEDRO A. REVILLA Judge Demetria Sta.

Maria Vda. de Bernal appealed to the Court of Appeals on ten (10) assigned errors, to wit: Error I.-The Trial Court erred in expressing doubt as to the existence of the Original of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449 of the Register of Deeds of Rizal and the authenticity of the owner's copy of said TCT No. 42449 Exhibit "C" contrary to the overwhelming evidence of record, and in not finding categorically that the original of said TCT No. 42449 was lost in the Register of Deeds' Office of Rizal, and that the owner's copy of said TCT No. 42449, Exhibit "C"

is genuine and authentic. Error II.-The Trial Court erred in not accepting at its face value the authenticity of Owner's Transfer Certificate of Title No. 42449, Exhibit "C", and Exhibit "J" of petitioner- appellant and in not ordering the reconstitution of the original of TCT No. 42449 on the face of overwhelming evidence establishing their authenticity and genuineness, pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 26: Error III.-The Trial Court erred in considering the original petition in its order of November 19, 1973 which is revived in its final order of September 18, 1974 when same was amended and proceedings was had on the basis of the Amended Petition of petitioner, and in drawing unwarranted adverse conclusions on the basis of the original petition without any evidentiary support.

Error IV.-The Trial Court erred in denying petitioner- appellant's petition to withdraw all annexes to the original petition after the admission of the Amended Petition which replaced the original filed by her former counsel. Error V.-The Trial Court erred in not sustaining petitioner- appellant's Motion to Dismiss all Oppositions and in not holding that the Director of Lands has neither interest in the case nor legal personality to oppose the reconstitution of petitioner's lost original Transfer Certificate of Title No. T- 42449 of the Rizal Registry. Error VI.-The Trial Court erred in admitting over petitioner's objection Exhibits "

I " to "5-C", inclusive of lone oppositor Director of Lands and in drawing conclusions therefrom adverse to herein petitioner-appellant. Error VII.-The Trial Court erred in taking judicial notice of Reconstitution Case No. 70 for reconstitution of a supposed lost TCT No. T-76 of Angel V. Cruz, estranged husband of herein appellant, before Branch XXV, Judge Reynaldo P. Honrado, presiding, of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, in its original order of November 19, 1973 and its final order of September 18, 1974, when same was never involved in the hearing of this case; and in undertaking a private investigation of the case in violation of appellant's constitutional right to due process, and settled jurisprudence on the matter.