Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Rojas v. City of Tagaytay

    Uploaded by

    Gia Dimayuga
    65 views1 page
    The second decree registering the same Lot 1 in favor of the City of Tagaytay is void due to res judicata. While the original survey plan and amendatory plan refer to the same 67,434 square meter parcel, the original plan describes it as one lot while the second plan subdivides it into four lots. However, this subdivision does not make the City the owner. Lot 1 had already been decreed in favor of Rojas et al. in the first case. Under settled law, a court has no jurisdiction to decree the registration of the same land that had already been decreed in an earlier case, and a second decree for the same land is null and void. The first registration is considered res judic

    Original Description:

    Land Titles and Deeds

    Original Title

    73. Rojas v. City of Tagaytay

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The second decree registering the same Lot 1 in favor of the City of Tagaytay is void due to res judicata. While the original survey plan and amendatory plan refer to the same 67,434 square meter parcel, the original plan describes it as one lot while the second plan subdivides it into four lots. However, this subdivision does not make the City the owner. Lot 1 had already been decreed in favor of Rojas et al. in the first case. Under settled law, a court has no jurisdiction to decree the registration of the same land that had already been decreed in an earlier case, and a second decree for the same land is null and void. The first registration is considered res judic

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    65 views1 page

    Rojas v. City of Tagaytay

    Uploaded by

    Gia Dimayuga
    The second decree registering the same Lot 1 in favor of the City of Tagaytay is void due to res judicata. While the original survey plan and amendatory plan refer to the same 67,434 square meter parcel, the original plan describes it as one lot while the second plan subdivides it into four lots. However, this subdivision does not make the City the owner. Lot 1 had already been decreed in favor of Rojas et al. in the first case. Under settled law, a court has no jurisdiction to decree the registration of the same land that had already been decreed in an earlier case, and a second decree for the same land is null and void. The first registration is considered res judic

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    73. Rojas v.

    City of Tagaytay, 106 Phil 512

    Second decree for the same land void; res judicata

    FACTS
    Zosimo Rojas, et  al. claiming  to  be the registered owners  of Lot No. 1 of an original survey
    plan, decreed in their favor in a case, have  filed  this petition  to nullify the order of the CFI of  Cavite
    with regard to the subsequent  Land Registration Case decreeing, for the second time, the registration of
    the same Lot No. 1, this time  in favor of the City of Tagaytay, as part of its amendatory plan.

    ISSUE
    W/N the second decree for the same Lot No. 1 is void by res judicata? [YES]

    RULING
    There is no conflict  between original  survey plan and the amendatory plan  for the latter is but
    a subdivision  plan,  as its  own title states.  Both  plans refer to a parcel of land whose total area is
    67,434  square  meters; the only difference is  that the original plan refers to one single parcel, while the
    second plan refers to the same parcel but  subdivided into four (4) lots.  The  fact that this latter plan 
    was  prepared  in the  name of the  City  of Tagaytay  does not make the City the owner  of  the lots
    therein described.  Petitioners Rojas, et.al. claims  only Lot 1 of the four mentioned in the plan and it
    was already decreed in favor of them by OCT No. 29 issued in  their names by the Register of Deeds of
    Cavite Province. 
    It  has  been well-settled that a Court of  First  Instance has no jurisdiction  to  decree again  the 
    registration of  land already decreed in an  earlier land registration case and a second decree for the
    same land is null and void.  Once decreed by a  court of competent jurisdiction, the title  to the  land
    thus determined is already a res judicata binding on the whole world, the proceedings being in rem.  
    The  court has no power in  a  subsequent proceeding (not based on fraud  and within the statutory
    period) to adjudicate the  same  title in favor  of another person.  Furthermore, the registration of the
    property in the name of the first registered owner in the Registration Book is a  standing notice to the
    world that said property is already registered  in  his  name.

    You might also like