Pajomayo Vs Manipon

G.R. No.
L-33676 June 30, 1971
MARIANO PAJOMAYO, PATRICIO PAJOMAYO, EUSEBIO PAJOMAYO, SOLEDAD

PAJOMAYO assisted by her husband FLORIANO CHITONGCO, DEMFTRIO
PAJOMAYO, CRISTITA PAJOMAYO assisted by her husband MANUEL RAMIREZ,
PATROCINIO PAJOMAYO and CRISPO PAJOMAYO, plaintiffs-appellees,
vs.
RODRIGO MANIPON and PERFECTA ZULUETA, defendants-appellants.
Francisco T. Gualberto for plaintiffs-appellees.
Tomas Tadeo, Jr. for defendants-appellants.
Doctrine:
Land registration; Preference between two titles covering same parcel of land.—Where the
parties submitted a stipulation of facts raising therein the sole issue of which of the two
certificates of title covering the same land shall prevail, and no other, the trial court correctly
ruled that plaintiff's O.C.T. No. 1089 prevails over defendants' O.C.T. No. 14034, the former
having been issued on 27 November 1931, or prior to the issuance of the latter on 1 April 1957.
FACTS:
The plaintiffs filed in the Court of First Instance of a complaint alleging that they are owners
pro-indiviso of the parcel of land which is covered by Original Certificate of Title No. 1089 in
the name of Diego Pajomayo, issued by the office of the Register of Deeds of Pangasinan; that
they had acquired the land as an inheritance from their late father Diego Pajomayo; that they and
their predecessor-in-interest had been in actual, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of said
property in the concept of owners for a period of more than 70 years until the early part of the
year 1956 when the defendants dispossessed them of said property
The defendants, after denying some of the allegations of the complaint, alleged that they are
the exclusive owners of a parcel of land covered by Original Certificate of Title No. 14043
issued by the office of the Register of Deeds of Pangasinan, the said land having been
adjudicated to them in the cadastral proceedings of the Malasique cadastre and that apparently
the plaintiffs are claiming the same parcel of land. The defendants claim they had acquired the
land mentioned in their answer by inheritance from their deceased father Pioquinto Manipon, and
that they and their predecessors-in-interest have been in actual, peaceful, and adverse possession
of said land for more than 70 years, to the reclusion of plaintiffs; and that as possessors in good
faith they have introduced on the land improvements worth P1,000.00.
Both parties claims that they are the exclusive owners of the land in dispute. Pajomayos had
with them OCT No. 1089 issued by the register of deeds on November 27, 1931 in virtue of the
homestead patent. The Manipons on the other hand had OCT No. 14043 issued on April 1, 1957,
in connection with the cadastral proceedings.
The CFI of Pangasinan found that OCT No. 1089 was issued earlier than OCT No. 14043
and
ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, ordering the defendants to vacate the land and the Register
Deeds for Pangasinan to cancel OCT No. 14034.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the title earlier in date should prevail. [YES]
RULING:
OCT No. 1089 should prevail. The decree of registration issued in the cadastral proceedings does
not have the effect of annulling the title that had previously been issued in accordance with the
provisions of the Land Registration Law (Act 496). The law requires that the homestead patent
must be registered in the Office of the Register of Deeds of the province where the land covered
by the patent lies (sec. 122 of Act 496 – Land Registration Law). Thus, once a homestead patent
granted in accordance with the Public Land Act is registered pursuant to sec. 122 of Act 496, the
certificate of title issued in virtue of said patent has the force and effect of a Torrens under the
Land Registration Act.
Where two certificates of title are issued to different persons covering the same land in
whole or in part, the earlier in date must prevail as between the original parties, and in case of
successive registration where more than one certificate is issued over the land the person holding
under the prior certificate is entitled to the land as against the person who relies on the second
certificate.
In this case, it appearing that Original Certificate of Title No. 14034 upon which the
defendant appellants base their claim of ownership over the land in question was issued on April
1, 1957, while Original Certificate of Title No. 1089 upon which plaintiffs-appellees base a
similar claim was issued on November 27, 1931, under the law and the authorities. The latter
certificate of title should prevail, and the former should be cancelled.

Pajomayo Vs Manipon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pajomayo Vs Manipon

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pajomayo Vs Manipon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. No.

L-33676 June 30, 1971

MARIANO PAJOMAYO, PATRICIO PAJOMAYO, EUSEBIO PAJOMAYO, SOLEDAD

Francisco T. Gualberto for plaintiffs-appellees.

Tomas Tadeo, Jr. for defendants-appellants.

You might also like