103 Legarda Vs Saleeby (31 Phil 590)
103 Legarda Vs Saleeby (31 Phil 590)
103 Legarda Vs Saleeby (31 Phil 590)
Singson, Ledesma and Lim for appellants. D.R. Williams for appellee. !O"NSON, J.# (ro) the record the follo*in+ facts appear, (irst. -hat the plaintiffs and the defendant occup., as o*ners, ad/oinin+ lots in the district of Er)ita in the cit. of Manila. 0econd. -hat there e1ists and has e1isted a nu)ber of .ears a stone *all bet*een the said lots. 0aid *all is located on the lot of the plaintiffs. -hird. -hat the plaintiffs, on the 2d da. of March, !2', presented a petition in the Court of $and Re+istration for the re+istration of their lot. After a consideration of said petition the court, on the 2"th da. of October, !2', decreed that the title of the plaintiffs should be re+istered and issued to the) the ori+inal certificate provided for under the -orrens s.ste). 0aid re+istration and certificate included the *all. (ourth. $ater the predecessor of the defendant presented a petition in the Court of $and Re+istration for the re+istration of the lot no* occupied b. hi). On the 2"th da. of March, ! 2, the court decreed the re+istration of said title and issued the ori+inal certificate provided for under the torrens s.ste). -he description of the lot +iven in the petition of the defendant also included said *all. (ifth. 0everal )onths later 3the &th da. of 4ece)ber, ! 25 the plaintiffs discovered that the *all *hich had been included in the certificate +ranted to the) had also been included in the certificate +ranted to the defendant. -he. i))ediatel. presented a petition in the Court of $and Re+istration for an ad/ust)ent and correction of the error co))itted b. includin+ said *all in the re+istered title of each of said parties. -he lo*er court ho*ever, *ithout notice to the defendant, denied said petition upon the theor. that, durin+ the pendenc. of the petition for the re+istration of the defendant6s land, the. failed to )a7e an. ob/ection to the re+istration of said lot, includin+ the *all, in the na)e of the defendant. 0i1th. -hat the land occupied b. t he *all is re+istered in the na)e of each of the o*ners of the ad/oinin+ lots. -he *all is not a /oint *all. 8nder these facts, *ho is the o*ner of the *all and the land occupied b. it9 -he decision of the lo*er court is based upon the theor. that the action for the re+istration of the lot of the defendant *as a /udicial proceedin+ and that the /ud+)ent or decree *as
bindin+ upon all parties *ho did not appear and oppose it. :n other *ords, b. reason of the fact that the plaintiffs had not opposed the re+istration of that part of the lot on *hich the *all *as situate the. had lost it, even thou+h it had been theretofore re+istered in their na)e. #rantin+ that theor. to be correct one, and +rantin+ even that the *all and the land occupied b. it, in fact, belon+ed to the defendant and his predecessors, then the sa)e theor. should be applied to the defendant hi)self. Appl.in+ that theor. to hi), he had alread. lost *hatever ri+ht he had therein, b. per)ittin+ the plaintiffs to have the sa)e re+istered in their na)e, )ore than si1 .ears before. ;avin+ thus lost hid ri+ht, )a. he be per)itted to re+ain it b. si)pl. includin+ it in a petition for re+istration9 -he plaintiffs havin+ secured the re+istration of their lot, includin+ the *all, *ere the. obli+ed to constantl. be on the alert and to *atch all the proceedin+s in the land court to see that so)e one else *as not havin+ all, or a portion of the sa)e, re+istered9 :f that <uestion is to be ans*ered in the affir)ative, then the *hole sche)e and purpose of the -orrens s.ste) of land re+istration )ust fail. -he real purpose of that s.ste) is to <uiet title to land= to put a stop forever to an. <uestion of the le+alit. of the title, e1cept clai)s *hich *ere noted at the ti)e of re+istration, in the certificate, or *hich )a. arise subse<uent thereto. -hat bein+ the purpose of the la*, it *ould see) that once a title is re+istered the o*ner )a. rest secure, *ithout the necessit. of *aitin+ in the portals of the court, or sittin+ in the >)irador de su casa,> to avoid the possibilit. of losin+ his land. Of course, it can not be denied that the proceedin+ for the re+istration of land under the -orrens s.ste) is /udicial 3Escueta vs. 4irector of $ands, ' Phil. Rep., ?%25. :t is clothed *ith all the for)s of an action and the result is final and bindin+ upon all the *orld. :t is an action in re). 3Escueta vs. 4irector of $ands 3supra5= #re. Alba vs. 4e la Cru@, A Phil. Rep., ?! Ro1as vs. Enri<ue@, 2! Phil. Rep., & = -.ler vs. Bud+es, A" Mass., " A)erican $and Co. vs. Ceiss, 2 ! 8.0., ?A.5 Dhile the proceedin+ is /udicial, it involves )ore in its conse<uences than does an ordinar. action. All the *orld are parties, includin+ the +overn)ent. After the re+istration is co)plete and final and there e1ists no fraud, there are no innocent third parties *ho )a. clai) an interest. -he ri+hts of all the *orld are foreclosed b. the decree of re+istration. -he +overn)ent itself assu)es the burden of +ivin+ notice to all parties. -o per)it persons *ho are parties in the re+istration proceedin+ 3and the. are all the *orld5 to a+ain liti+ate the sa)e <uestions, and to a+ain cast doubt upon the validit. of the re+istered title, *ould destro. the ver. purpose and intent of the la*. -he re+istration, under the torrens s.ste), does not +ive the o*ner an. better title than he had. :f he does not alread. have a perfect title, he can not have it re+istered. (ee si)ple titles onl. )a. be re+istered. -he certificate of re+istration accu)ulates in open docu)ent a precise and correct state)ent of the e1act status of the fee held b. its o*ner. -he certificate, in the absence of fraud, is the evidence of title and sho*s e1actl. the real interest of its o*ner. -he title once re+istered, *ith ver. fe* e1ceptions, should not thereafter be i)pu+ned, altered, chan+ed, )odified, enlar+ed, or di)inished, e1cept in so)e direct proceedin+ per)itted b. la*. Other*ise all securit. in re+istered titles *ould be lost. A re+istered title can not be altered, )odified, enlar+ed, or di)inished in a collateral proceedin+ and not even b. a direct proceedin+, after the lapse of the period prescribed b. la*. (or the difficult. involved in the present case the Act 3No. ?!'5 providin+ for the re+istration of titles under the torrens s.ste) affords us no re)ed.. -here is no provision in said Act +ivin+ the parties relief under conditions li7e the present. -here is nothin+ in the Act *hich indicates *ho should be the o*ner of land *hich has been re+istered in the na)e of t*o different persons. -he rule, *e thin7, is *ell settled that the decree orderin+ the re+istration of a particular parcel of land is a bar to future liti+ation over the sa)e bet*een the sa)e parties. :n vie* of the fact that all the *orld are parties, it )ust follo* that future liti+ation over the title is forever barred= there can be no persons *ho are not parties to the action. -his, *e thin7, is the rule, e1cept as to ri+hts *hich are noted in the certificate or *hich arise subse<uentl.,
and *ith certain other e1ceptions *hich need not be dis)issed at present. A title once re+istered can not be defeated, even b. an adverse, open, and notorious possession. Re+istered title under the -orrens s.ste) can not be defeated b. prescription 3section ?', Act No. ?!'5. -he title, once re+istered, is notice to the *orld. All persons )ust ta7e notice. No one can plead i+norance of the re+istration. -he <uestion, *ho is the o*ner of land re+istered in the na)e of t*o different persons, has been presented to the courts in other /urisdictions. :n so)e /urisdictions, *here the >torrens> s.ste) has been adopted, the difficult. has been settled b. e1press statutor. provision. :n others it has been settled b. the courts. ;o++, in his e1cellent discussion of the >Australian -orrens 0.ste),> at pa+e %2&, sa.s, >-he +eneral rule is that in the case of t*o certificates of title, purportin+ to include the sa)e land, the earlier in date prevails, *hether the land co)prised in the latter certificate be *holl., or onl. in part, co)prised in the earlier certificate. 3Oel7ers vs. Merr., 2 E.0.C.R., !&= Miller vs. 4av., A N.C.R., ""= $lo.d vs. M.field, A A.$.-. 3F.5 ?%= 0tevens vs. Dillia)s, 2 F.$. R., "2= Re+ister of -itles, vs. Esperance $and Co., D.A.R., %.5> ;o++ adds ho*ever that, >if it can be ver. clearl. ascertained b. the ordinar. rules of construction relatin+ to *ritten docu)ents, that the inclusion of the land in the certificate of title of prior date is a )ista7e, the )ista7e )a. be rectified b. holdin+ the latter of the t*o certificates of title to be conclusive.> 30ee ;o++ on the >Australian torrens 0.ste),> supra, and cases cited. 0ee also the e1cellent *or7 of Niblac7 in his >Anal.sis of the -orrens 0.ste),> pa+e !!.5 Niblac7, in discussin+ the +eneral <uestion, said, >Dhere t*o certificates purport to include the sa)e land the earlier in date prevails. ... :n successive re+istrations, *here )ore than one certificate is issued in respect of a particular estate or interest in land, the person clai)in+ under the prior certificates is entitled to the estate or interest= and that person is dee)ed to hold under the prior certificate *ho is the holder of, or *hose clai) is derived directl. or indirectl. fro) the person *ho *as the holder of the earliest certificate issued in respect thereof. Dhile the acts in this countr. do not e1pressl. cover the case of the issue of t*o certificates for the sa)e land, the. provide that a re+istered o*ner shall hold the title, and the effect of this undoubtedl. is that *here t*o certificates purport to include the sa)e re+istered land, the holder of the earlier one continues to hold the title> 3p. 2&A5. 0ection &% of Act No. ?!', provides that= >:t 3the decree of re+istration5 shall be conclusive upon and a+ainst all persons, includin+ the :nsular #overn)ent and all the branches thereof, *hether )entioned b. na)e in the application, notice, or citation, or included in the +eneral description >-o all *ho) it )a. concern.> 0uch decree shall not be opened b. reason of the absence, infanc., or other disabilit. of an. person affected thereb., nor b. an. proceedin+ in an. court for reversin+ /ud+)ents or decrees= sub/ect, ho*ever, to the ri+ht of an. person deprived of land or of an. estate or interest therein b. decree of re+istration obtained b. fraud to file in the Court of $and Re+istration a petition for revie* *ithin one .ear after entr. of the decree 3of re+istration5, provided no innocent purchaser for value has ac<uired an interest. :t *ill be noted, fro) said section, that the >decree of re+istration> shall not be opened, for an. reason, in an. court, e1cept for fraud, and not even for fraud, after the lapse of one .ear. :f then the decree of re+istration can not be opened for an. reason, e1cept for fraud, in a direct proceedin+ for that purpose, )a. such decree be opened or set aside in a collateral proceedin+ b. includin+ a portion of the land in a subse<uent certificate or decree of re+istration9 De do not believe the la* conte)plated that a person could be deprived of his re+istered title in that *a.. De have in this /urisdiction a +eneral statutor. provision *hich +overns the ri+ht of the o*nership of land *hen the sa)e is re+istered in the ordinar. re+istr. in the na)e of t*o persons. Article ?A& of the Civil Code provides, a)on+ other thin+s, that *hen one piece of
real propert. had been sold to t*o different persons it shall belon+ to the person ac<uirin+ it, *ho first inscribes it in the re+istr.. -his rule, of course, presupposes that each of the vendees or purchasers has ac<uired title to the land. -he real o*nership in such a case depends upon priorit. of re+istration. Dhile *e do not no* decide that the +eneral provisions of the Civil Code are applicable to the $and Re+istration Act, even thou+h *e see no ob/ection thereto, .et *e thin7, in the absence of other e1press provisions, the. should have a persuasive influence in adoptin+ a rule for +overnin+ the effect of a double re+istration under said Act. Adoptin+ the rule *hich *e believe to be )ore in consonance *ith the purposes and the real intent of the torrens s.ste), *e are of the opinion and so decree that in case land has been re+istered under the $and Re+istration Act in the na)e of t*o different persons, the earlier in date shall prevail. :n reachin+ the above conclusion, *e have not overloo7ed the forceful ar+u)ent of the appellee. ;e sa.s, a)on+ other thin+s= >Dhen Prieto et al. *ere served *ith notice of the application of -eus 3the predecessor of the defendant5 the. beca)e defendants in a proceedin+ *herein he, -eus, *as see7in+ to foreclose their ri+ht, and that of orders, to the parcel of land described in his application. -hrou+h their failure to appear and contest his ri+ht thereto, and the subse<uent entr. of a default /ud+)ent a+ainst the), the. beca)e irrevocabl. bound b. the decree ad/udicatin+ such land to -eus. -he. had their da. in court and can not set up their o*n o)ission as +round for i)pu+nin+ the validit. of a /ud+)ent dul. entered b. a court of co)petent /urisdiction. -o decide other*ise *ould be to hold that lands *ith torrens titles are above the la* and be.ond the /urisdiction of the courts>. As *as said above, the pri)ar. and funda)ental purpose of the torrens s.ste) is to <uiet title. :f the holder of a certificate cannot rest secure in this re+istered title then the purpose of the la* is defeated. :f those dealin+ *ith re+istered land cannot rel. upon the certificate, then nothin+ has been +ained b. the re+istration and the e1pense incurred thereb. has been in vain. :f the holder )a. lose a strip of his re+istered land b. the )ethod adopted in the present case, he )a. lose it all. 0uppose *ithin the si1 .ears *hich elapsed after the plaintiff had secured their title, the. had )ort+a+ed or sold their ri+ht, *hat *ould be the position or ri+ht of the )ort+a+ee or vendee9 -hat )ista7es are bound to occur cannot be denied, and so)eti)es the da)a+e done thereb. is irreparable. :t is the dut. of the courts to ad/ust the ri+hts of the parties under such circu)stances so as to )ini)i@e such da)a+es, ta7in+ into consideration all of the conditions and the dili+ence of the respective parties to avoid the). :n the present case, the appellee *as the first ne+li+ent 3+rantin+ that he *as the real o*ner, and if he *as not the real o*ner he can not co)plain5 in not opposin+ the re+istration in the na)e of the appellants. ;e *as a part.-defendant in an action for the re+istration of the lot in <uestion, in the na)e of the appellants, in !2'. >-hrou+h his failure to appear and to oppose such re+istration, and the subse<uent entr. of a default /ud+)ent a+ainst hi), he beca)e irrevocabl. bound b. the decree ad/udicatin+ such land to the appellants. ;e had his da. in court and should not be per)itted to set up his o*n o)issions as the +round for i)pu+nin+ the validit. of a /ud+)ent dul. entered b. a court of co)petent /urisdiction.> #rantin+ that he *as the o*ner of the land upon *hich the *all is located, his failure to oppose the re+istration of the sa)e in the na)e of the appellants, in the absence of fraud, forever closes his )outh a+ainst i)pu+nin+ the validit. of that /ud+)ent. -here is no )ore reason *h. the doctrine invo7ed b. the appellee should be applied to the appellants than to hi). De have decided, in case of double re+istration under the $and Re+istration Act, that the o*ner of the earliest certificate is the o*ner of the land. -hat is the rule bet*een ori+inal parties. Ma. this rule be applied to successive vendees of the o*ners of such certificates9 0uppose that one or the other of the parties, before the error is discovered, transfers his ori+inal certificate to an >innocent purchaser.> -he +eneral rule is that the vendee of land has no +reater ri+ht, title, or interest than his vendor= that he ac<uires the ri+ht *hich his
vendor had, onl.. 8nder that rule the vendee of the earlier certificate *ould be the o*ner as a+ainst the vendee of the o*ner of the later certificate. De find statutor. provisions *hich, upon first readin+, see) to cast so)e doubt upon the rule that the vendee ac<uires the interest of the vendor onl.. 0ections &%, "", and 2 of Act No. ?!' indicate that the vendee )a. ac<uire ri+hts and be protected a+ainst defenses *hich the vendor *ould not. 0aid sections spea7 of available ri+hts in favor of third parties *hich are cut off b. virtue of the sale of the land to an >innocent purchaser.> -hat is to sa., persons *ho had had a ri+ht or interest in land *ron+full. included in an ori+inal certificate *ould be unable to enforce such ri+hts a+ainst an >innocent purchaser,> b. virtue of the provisions of said sections. :n the present case -eus had his land, includin+ the *all, re+istered in his na)e. ;e subse<uentl. sold the sa)e to the appellee. :s the appellee an >innocent purchaser,> as that phrase is used in said sections9 Ma. those *ho have been deprived of their land b. reason of a )ista7e in the ori+inal certificate in favor of -eus be deprived of their ri+ht to the sa)e, b. virtue of the sale b. hi) to the appellee9 0uppose the appellants had sold their lot, includin+ the *all, to an >innocent purchaser,> *ould such purchaser be included in the phrase >innocent purchaser,> as the sa)e is used in said sections9 8nder these e1a)ples there *ould be t*o innocent purchasers of the sa)e land, is said sections are to be applied .Dhich of the t*o innocent purchasers, if the. are both to be re+arded as innocent purchasers, should be protected under the provisions of said sections9 -hese <uestions indicate the difficult. *ith *hich *e are )et in +ivin+ )eanin+ and effect to the phrase >innocent purchaser,> in said sections. Ma. the purchaser of land *hich has been included in a >second ori+inal certificate> ever be re+arded as an >innocent purchaser,> as a+ainst the ri+hts or interest of the o*ner of the first ori+inal certificate, his heirs, assi+ns, or vendee9 -he first ori+inal certificate is recorded in the public re+istr.. :t is never issued until it is recorded. -he record notice to all the *orld. All persons are char+ed *ith the 7no*led+e of *hat it contains. All persons dealin+ *ith the land so recorded, or an. portion of it, )ust be char+ed *ith notice of *hatever it contains. -he purchaser is char+ed *ith notice of ever. fact sho*n b. the record and is presu)ed to 7no* ever. fact *hich the record discloses .-his rule is so *ell established that it is scarcel. necessar. to cite authorities in its support 3North*estern National Ban7 vs. (ree)an, A 8.0., '22, '2!= 4elvin on Real Estate, sections A 2, A 2 GaH5. Dhen a conve.ance has been properl. recorded such record is constructive notice of its contents and all interests, le+al and e<uitable, included therein. 3#randin vs. Anderson, " Ohio 0tate, 2%', 2%!= Orvis vs. Ne*ell, A Conn., !A= Buchanan vs. :ntentional Ban7, A% :ll., "22= Ioun+s vs. Dilson, 2A N.I., &" = McCabe vs. #re., 22 Cal., "2!= Montefiore vs. Bro*ne, A ;ouse of $ords Cases, &? .5 8nder the rule of notice, it is presu)ed that the purchaser has e1a)ined ever. instru)ent of record affectin+ the title. 0uch presu)ption is irrebutable. ;e is char+ed *ith notice of ever. fact sho*n b. the record and is presu)ed to 7no* ever. fact *hich an e1a)ination of the record *ould have disclosed. -his presu)ption cannot be overco)e b. proof of innocence or +ood faith. Other*ise the ver. purpose and ob/ect of the la* re<uirin+ a record *ould be destro.ed. 0uch presu)ption cannot be defeated b. proof of *ant of 7no*led+e of *hat the record contains an. )ore than one )a. be per)itted to sho* that he *as i+norant of the provisions of the la*. -he rule that all persons )ust ta7e notice of the facts *hich the public record contains is a rule of la*. -he rule )ust be absolute. An. variation *ould lead to endless confusion and useless liti+ation. Dhile there is no statutor. provision in force here re<uirin+ that ori+inal deeds of conve.ance of real propert. be recorded, .et there is a rule re<uirin+ )ort+a+es to be recorded. 3Arts. %A" and '2' of the Civil Code.5 -he record of a )ort+a+e is indispensable
to its validit.. 3Art . %A".5 :n the face of that statute *ould the courts allo* a )ort+a+e to be valid *hich had not been recorded, upon the plea of i+norance of the statutor. provision, *hen third parties *ere interested9 Ma. a purchaser of land, subse<uent to the recorded )ort+a+e, plead i+norance of its e1istence, and b. reason of such i+norance have the land released fro) such lien9 Could a purchaser of land, after the recorded )ort+a+e, be relieved fro) the )ort+a+e lien b. the plea that he *as a bona fide purchaser9 Ma. there be a bona fide purchaser of said land, bona fide in the sense that he had no 7no*led+e of the e1istence of the )ort+a+e9 De believe the rule that all persons )ust ta7e notice of *hat the public record contains in /ust as obli+ator. upon all persons as the rule that all )en )ust 7no* the la*= that no one can plead i+norance of the la*. -he fact that all )en 7no* the la* is contrar. to the presu)ption. -he conduct of )en, at ti)es, sho*s clearl. that the. do not 7no* the la*. -he rule, ho*ever, is )andator. and obli+ator., not*ithstandin+. :t *ould be /ust as lo+ical to allo* the defense of i+norance of the e1istence and contents of a public record. :n vie*, therefore, of the fore+oin+ rules of la*, )a. the purchaser of land fro) the o*ner of the second ori+inal certificate be an >innocent purchaser,> *hen a part or all of such land had theretofore been re+istered in the na)e of another, not the vendor9 De are of the opinion that said sections &%, "", and 2 should not be applied to such purchasers. De do not believe that the phrase >innocent purchaser should be applied to such a purchaser. ;e cannot be re+arded as an >innocent purchaser> because of the facts contained in the record of the first ori+inal certificate. -he rule should not be applied to the purchaser of a parcel of land the vendor of *hich is not the o*ner of the ori+inal certificate, or his successors. ;e, in nonsense, can be an >innocent purchaser> of the portion of the land included in another earlier ori+inal certificate. -he rule of notice of *hat the record contains precludes the idea of innocence. B. reason of the prior re+istr. there cannot be an innocent purchaser of land included in a prior ori+inal certificate and in a na)e other than that of the vendor, or his successors. :n order to )ini)i@e the difficulties *e thin7 this is the safe rule to establish. De believe the phrase >innocent purchaser,> used in said sections, should be li)ited onl. to cases *here unre+istered land has been *ron+full. included in a certificate under the torrens s.ste). Dhen land is once brou+ht under the torrens s.ste), the record of the ori+inal certificate and all subse<uent transfers thereof is notice to all the *orld. -hat bein+ the rule, could -eus even re+arded as the holder in +ood fifth of that part of the land included in his certificate of the appellants9 De thin7 not. 0uppose, for e1a)ple, that -eus had never had his lot re+istered under the torrens s.ste). 0uppose he had sold his lot to the appellee and had included in his deed of transfer the ver. strip of land no* in <uestion. Could his vendee be re+arded as an >innocent purchaser> of said strip9 Dould his vendee be an >innocent purchaser> of said strip9 Certainl. not. -he record of the ori+inal certificate of the appellants precludes the possibilit.. ;as the appellee +ained an. ri+ht b. reason of the re+istration of the strip of land in the na)e of his vendor9 Appl.in+ the rule of notice resultin+ fro) the record of the title of the appellants, the <uestion )ust be ans*ered in the ne+ative. De are of the opinion that these rules are )ore in har)on. *ith the purpose of Act No. ?!' than the rule contended for b. the appellee. De believe that the purchaser fro) the o*ner of the later certificate, and his successors, should be re<uired to resort to his vendor for da)a+es, in case of a )ista7e li7e the present, rather than to )olest the holder of the first certificate *ho has been +uilt. of no ne+li+ence. -he holder of the first ori+inal certificate and his successors should be per)itted to rest secure in their title, a+ainst one *ho had ac<uired ri+hts in conflict there*ith and *ho had full and co)plete 7no*led+e of their ri+hts. -he purchaser of land included in the second ori+inal certificate, b. reason of the facts contained in the public record and the 7no*led+e *ith *hich he is char+ed and b. reason of his ne+li+ence, should suffer the loss, if an., resultin+ fro) such purchase, rather than he *ho has obtained the first certificate and *ho *as innocent of an. act of ne+li+ence.
-he fore+oin+ decision does not solve, nor pretend to solve, all the difficulties resultin+ fro) double re+istration under the torrens s.ste) and the subse<uent transfer of the land. Neither do *e no* atte)pt to decide the effect of the for)er re+istration in the ordinar. re+istr. upon the re+istration under the torrens s.ste). De are inclined to the vie*, *ithout decidin+ it, that the record under the torrens s.ste), supersede all other re+istries. :f that vie* is correct then it *ill be sufficient, in dealin+ *ith land re+istered and recorded alone. Once land is re+istered and recorded under the torrens s.ste), that record alone can be e1a)ined for the purpose of ascertainin+ the real status of the title to the land. :t *ould be seen to a /ust and e<uitable rule, *hen t*o persons have ac<uired e<ual ri+hts in the sa)e thin+, to hold that the one *ho ac<uired it first and *ho has co)plied *ith all the re<uire)ents of the la* should be protected. :n vie* of our conclusions, above stated, the /ud+)ent of the lo*er court should be and is hereb. revo7ed. -he record is hereb. returned to the court no* havin+ and e1ercisin+ the /urisdiction heretofore e1ercised b. the land court, *ith direction to )a7e such orders and decrees in the pre)ises as )a. correct the error heretofore )ade in includin+ the land in the second ori+inal certificate issued in favor of the predecessor of the appellee, as *ell as in all other duplicate certificates issued. Dithout an. findin+s as to costs, it is so ordered. Arellano, C.J., Torrens, and Araullo, JJ., concur. DIGEST Posted b. Pius Morados on Nove)ber 2A, 22 (Land Titles and Deeds urpose of t!e Torrens S"stem of Registration# $a%ts, A stone *all stands bet*een the ad/oinin+ lot of $e+arda and 0aleeb.. -he said *all and the strip of land *here it stands is re+istered in the -orrens s.ste) under the na)e of $e+arda in !2'. 0i1 .ears after the decree of re+istration is released in favor of $e+arda, 0aleeb. applied for re+istration of his lot under the -orrens s.ste) in ! 2, and the decree issued in favor of the latter included the stone *all and the strip of land *here it stands. Issue, Dho should be the o*ner of a land and its i)prove)ent *hich has been re+istered under the na)e of t*o persons9 "e&d, (or the issue involved, -he $and Re+istration Act 3Act ?!'5 affords no re)ed.. ;o*ever, it can be construed that *here t*o certificates purports to include the sa)e re+istered land, the holder of the earlier one continues to hold title and *ill prevail. -he real purpose of the -orrens s.ste) of re+istration, is to <uiet title to land= to put a stop forever to an. <uestion of the le+alit. of the title, e1cept clai)s *hich *ere noted at the ti)e of re+istration, in the certificate, or *hich )a. arise subse<uent thereto. -hat bein+ the purpose of the la*, once a title is re+istered the o*ner )a. rest secure, *ithout the necessit. of *aitin+ in the portals of the court, or sittin+ in the $mirador de su casa,% to avoid the possibilit. of losin+ his land. -he la* +uarantees the title of the re+istered o*ner once it has entered into the -orrens s.ste).