Ybanez v. IAC - Patent, LTD

ARCADIO, MELQUIADES, ABDULA, EUGENIO, APOLONIO, all surnamed YBAÑEZ, petitioners,
Vs. THE HONORABLE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and VALENTIN O. OUANO, respondents,
G.R. No. L-68291, March 6, 1991
FACTS: Private respondent Valentin Ouano, a claimant-occupant of Lot No. 986, Pls-599-D situated at
sitio Bagsac, barrio of Manikling, Governor Generoso (now San Isidro), Davao del Norte, filed on February
27, 1959 a homestead application with the Bureau of Lands. On March 4, 1963, an order for the issuance
of patent was issued by the Bureau of Lands. The Homestead Patent was transcribed in the "Registration
Book" for the province of Davao on October 28, 1963.
However, after 19 years of possession and cultivation on the said land private respondent Valentin Ouano
was interrupted in his peaceful occupation thereof when a certain Arcadio Ybanez and his sons,
Melquiades, Abdula, Eugenia Numeriano, Apolonio and Victoriano, forcibly and unlawfully entered the land
armed with spears, canes and bolos.
Because of the unwarranted refusal of Arcadio Ybanez, et al. to vacate the premises, private respondent
Valentin Ouano filed a complaint for recovery of possession, damages and attorney's fees against the
Ybanez. In his complaint, Valentin Ouano, alleged that he has been in lawful and peaceful possession since
1956 of a parcel of land designated as Lot No. 986, Pls-599-D situated in Bagsac, Manikling, Governor
Generoso (now San Isidro), Davao Oriental, to which an Original Certificate of Title No. P-(l5353)-P-3932
was issued in his name.
Petitioners, on the other hand, alleged that the homestead patent issued by the Director of Lands to private
respondent Valentin Ouano was improperly and erroneously issued, since on the basis of their investigation
and relocation survey, the actual occupation and cultivation was made by petitioner Arcadio Ybañez and
his children, consisting of 9.6 hectares which cover the whole of Lot No. 986 and portions of Lot Nos. 987,
988 and 989; that based on the ocular inspection conducted, it was established that Valentin Ouano did not
have a house on the land and cannot locate the boundaries of his titled land for he never resided therein.
That the indefeasibility of a certificate of title must not be a sword for an offense nor should it be allowed to
perpetrate fraud.
RTC: ruled in favor of Oueno. The Ybanez are ordered to vacate the premises of Lot 986, PLS-599-D,
situated at Sitio Bagsac, Manikling, San Isidro, Governor Generoso and to return the possession thereof to
the plaintiff Valentin Ouano together with all the improvements therein.
IAC: affirmed the decision of RTC. Hence, the present petition.
ISSUE: WON the petitioners (Ybanez) can assail the validity of the homestead patent issued in favor of
Ouano on the ground of actual fraud. NO
HELD: No. It was erroneous for petitioners to question the Torrens Original Certificate of Title issued to
private respondent in an ordinary civil action for recovery of possession filed by the registered owner of the
said lot. Such a defense partakes of the nature of a collateral attack against a certificate of title brought
under the operation of the Torrens system of registration. The case law on the matter does not allow a
collateral attack on the Torrens certificate of title on the ground of actual fraud.
The certificate of title serves as evidence of an indefeasible title to the property in favor of the person whose
name appears therein. After the expiration of the one (1) year period from the issuance of the decree of
registration upon which it is based, it becomes incontrovertible. The settled rule is that a decree of
registration and the certificate of title issued pursuant thereto may be attacked on the ground of
actual fraud within one (1) year from the date of its entry and such an attack must be direct and not
by a collateral proceeding. The validity of the certificate of title in this regard can be threshed out only in
an action expressly filed for the purpose.
It must be emphasized that a certificate of title issued under an administrative proceeding pursuant to a
homestead patent, as in the instant case, is as indefeasible as a certificate of title issued under a judicial
registration proceeding, provided the land covered by said certificate is a disposable public land within the
contemplation of the Public Land Law.
In the instant case, the public land certificate of title issued to private respondent attained the status
of indefeasibility one (1) year after the issuance of patent on April 15, 1963, hence, it is no longer
open to review on the ground of actual fraud. Consequently, the filing of the protest before the Bureau
of Lands against the Homestead Application of private respondent on January 3, 1975, or 12 years after,
can no longer re-open or revise the public land certificate of title on the ground of actual fraud. No
reasonable and plausible excuse has been shown for such an unusual delay. The law serves those who
are vigilant and diligent and not those who sleep when the law requires them to act.
Although petitioners (Ybanez) may still have the remedy of reconveyance, assuming that they are
the "owners" and actual occupants of Lot No. 986, as claimed by them before the trial court, this
remedy, however, can no longer be availed of by petitioners due to prescription. The prescriptive
period for the reconveyance of fraudulently registered real property is ten (10) years reckoned from
the date of the issuance of the certificate of title.
WHEREFORE, petition is DENIED for lack of merit (SC ruled in favor of Oueno).

Ybanez v. IAC - Patent, LTD

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Ybanez v. IAC - Patent, LTD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

ARCADIO, MELQUIADES, ABDULA, EUGENIO, APOLONIO, all surnamed YBAÑEZ, petitioners,

G.R. No. L-68291, March 6, 1991

IAC: affirmed the decision of RTC. Hence, the present petition.

You might also like