Scribd
Upload
914 views

MARTINEZ Vs CA

1) Gregoria Merquines represented herself as Gregoria Martinez and applied for free patents over properties that belonged to the heirs of Melanio Medina, Sr. 2) The OCTs for the properties were issued to Gregoria Martinez, unknown to the real owners. 3) When the real owners filed for land registration, Gregoria Merquines opposed it. The RTC then ordered the cancellation of the OCTs issued to Gregoria Martinez due to fraud in their procurement.

Uploaded by

Elaine Grace R. Antenor
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
914 views

MARTINEZ Vs CA

1) Gregoria Merquines represented herself as Gregoria Martinez and applied for free patents over properties that belonged to the heirs of Melanio Medina, Sr. 2) The OCTs for the properties were issued to Gregoria Martinez, unknown to the real owners. 3) When the real owners filed for land registration, Gregoria Merquines opposed it. The RTC then ordered the cancellation of the OCTs issued to Gregoria Martinez due to fraud in their procurement.

Uploaded by

Elaine Grace R. Antenor
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

MARTINEZ vs. COURT OF APPEALS [G.R. No.

170409, January 28, 2008] FACTS: Respondents are the heirs of the late Melanio Medina, Sr. who during his lifetime inherited the subject properties from his mother, who in turn inherited them from her own mother, Celedonia Martinez (Celedonia). The complaint alleged that sometime in 1992, petitioner, whose real name as appearing in her birth certificate is Gregoria Merquines, represented herself as Gregoria Martinez and as thus one of the descendants of Celedonia, and under that name applied for free patents over the subject properties with the CENRO of Bacoor, Cavite. Unbeknownst to private respondents, the corresponding OCTs were thus issued in the name of Gregoria Martinez. When private respondents later filed an application for land registration over the same properties, petitioner opposed the same. Private respondents filed the instant complaint. The RTC ordered the cancellation of OCT Nos. P-5518, P-5519 and P-5482 issued in the name of defendant. Hence this appeal. ISSUE: Whether the free patents and land titles should be annulled due to fraud and misrepresentation in their procurement? HELD: YES. A certificate of title issued on the basis of a free patent procured through fraud or in violation of the law may be cancelled, as such title is not cloaked with indefeasibility.

You might also like