0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)
150 vues2 pages
The Supreme Court ruled against petitioner New Regent Sources, Inc. in its claim over two parcels of land registered under respondent Tanjuatco's name. The Court found that petitioner failed to prove its entitlement to ownership of the lands and did not establish that the registration was procured through fraud. Specifically:
1. Petitioner did not present sufficient evidence that it satisfied the legal requirements for acquisition of the lands through accretion from adjacent properties.
2. Respondent derived his title from certificates of title registered under the Republic, which originally owned the lands.
3. Petitioner did not prove that its officer was authorized to acquire the lands on its behalf or that the registration was fraudulent.
4. The requirements for
The Supreme Court ruled against petitioner New Regent Sources, Inc. in its claim over two parcels of land registered under respondent Tanjuatco's name. The Court found that petitioner failed to prove its entitlement to ownership of the lands and did not establish that the registration was procured through fraud. Specifically:
1. Petitioner did not present sufficient evidence that it satisfied the legal requirements for acquisition of the lands through accretion from adjacent properties.
2. Respondent derived his title from certificates of title registered under the Republic, which originally owned the lands.
3. Petitioner did not prove that its officer was authorized to acquire the lands on its behalf or that the registration was fraudulent.
4. The requirements for
The Supreme Court ruled against petitioner New Regent Sources, Inc. in its claim over two parcels of land registered under respondent Tanjuatco's name. The Court found that petitioner failed to prove its entitlement to ownership of the lands and did not establish that the registration was procured through fraud. Specifically:
1. Petitioner did not present sufficient evidence that it satisfied the legal requirements for acquisition of the lands through accretion from adjacent properties.
2. Respondent derived his title from certificates of title registered under the Republic, which originally owned the lands.
3. Petitioner did not prove that its officer was authorized to acquire the lands on its behalf or that the registration was fraudulent.
4. The requirements for
NEW REGENT SOURCES, INC. V. TANJUATCO FACTS: Petitioner New Regent Sources, Inc. (NRSI) filed !o"plint for Rescission#$eclrtion of Nullit% of !ontrct, Recon&e%nce nd $"ges ginst respondent 'n(utco nd t)e Register of $eeds of !l"* *efore t)e R'! of !l"*, +gun. NRSI lleged t)t in 199,, it ut)ori-ed .icente P. !ue&s III, its !)ir"n nd President, to ppl% on its *e)lf, for t)e c/uisition of two prcels of lnd *% &irtue of its rig)t of ccretion. !ue&s purportedl% pplied for t)e lots in )is n"e *% p%ing P02,,00.10 to t)e 2ureu of +nds. 3n 4nur% 2, 1995, !ue&s nd )is wife e6ecuted .oting 'rust Agree"ent o&er t)eir s)res of stoc7 in t)e corportion. ')en, pending ppro&l of t)e ppliction wit) t)e 2ureu of +nds, !ue&s ssigned )is rig)t to 'n(utco for t)e su" of P05,000. 3n 8rc) 12, 1996, t)e $irector of +nds relesed n 3rder, w)ic) ppro&ed t)e trnsfer of rig)ts fro" !ue&s to 'n(utco. Transfer Certf!ates of Tt"e #ere t$en ss%e& n t$e na'e of Tan(%at!o . In )is Answer wit) !ountercli", 'n(utco d&nced t)e ffir"ti&e defense t)t t)e co"plint stted no cuse of ction ginst )i". According to 'n(utco, it ws !ue&s w)o ws lleged to )&e defruded t)e corportion. 9e &erred furt)er t)t t)e co"plint did not c)rge )i" wit) 7nowledge of t)e gree"ent *etween !ue&s nd NRSI. R'! dis"issed t)e co"plint of petitioner on de"urrer to e&idence nd )eld t)t 'n(utco is n innocent purc)ser for &lue. ISS:;< =#N NRSI ws *le to su*stntite its cli" of entitle"ent to owners)ip of t)e lnds in 'n(utco>s n"e 9;+$< No. NRSI nc)ors its cli" o&er t)e lnds su*(ects of t)is cse on t)e rig)t of ccretion. It su*"itted in e&idence, titles to four prcels of lnd, w)ic) llegedl% d(oin t)e lots in t)e n"e of 'n(utco. 2ut it "ust *e stressed t)t a!!reton as a 'o&e of a!)%rn* +ro+ert, %n&er Art!"e -./ of t$e C0" Co&e re)%res t$e !on!%rren!e of t$e fo""o#n* re)%stes< (1) t)t t)e deposition of soil or sedi"ent *e grdul nd i"percepti*le? (2) t)t it *e t)e result of t)e ction of t)e wters of t)e ri&er? nd (1) t)t t)e lnd w)ere ccretion t7es plce is d(cent to t)e *n7s of ri&ers. ')us, it is not enoug) to *e riprin owner in order to en(o% t)e *enefits of ccretion. One #$o !"a's t$e r*$t of a!!reton '%st s$o# 1, +re+on&erant e0&en!e t$at $e $as 'et a"" t$e !on&tons +ro0&e& 1, "a#. Petitioner )s not*l% filed in t)is regrd s it did not offer n% e&idence to pro&e t)t it )s stisfied t)e foregoing re/uisites. @urt)er, it is undisputed t)t 'n(utco deri&ed )is title to t)e lnds fro" 3riginl !ertificte of 'itle (3!') No. 2,5 registered in t)e n"e of t)e Repu*lic of t)e P)ilippines. Sid prcels of lnd for"ed prt of t)e $ried Sn 4un Ri&er 2ed, w)ic) under Article 502 (1) of t)e !i&il !ode rig)tl% pertins to t)e pu*lic do"inion. ')e !ertifiction issued *% @orester III ;"ilino S. +e&iste confir"s t)t sid lnds were &erified to *e wit)in t)e Alien*le nd $ispos*le, certified nd declred s suc) on Septe"*er 20, 1901. C"ear",, t$e Re+%1"! s t$e entt, #$!$ $a& e0er, r*$t to transfer o#ners$+ t$ereof to res+on&ent. Ne6t, petitioner soug)t to est*lis) frudulent registrtion of t)e lnd in t)e n"e of 'n(utco. NRSI presented *efore t)e tril court cop% of t)e .oting 'rust Agree"ent w)ic) t)e spouses !ue&s e6ecuted in f&or of Puline !o. 9owe&er, not)ing in sid gree"ent indictes t)t NRSI e"powered !ue&s to ppl% for t)e registrtion of t)e su*(ect lots on its *e)lf. Neit)er did petitioner dduce e&idence to pro&e t)t !ue&s ws its President nd !)ir"n. ;&en ssu"ing t)t !ue&s ws t)e president of NRSI, )is powers re confined onl% to t)ose &ested upon )i" *% t)e *ord of directors or fi6ed in t)e *%Alws. In trut), petitioner could )&e esil% presented its *%Alws or corporte resolution to s)ow !ue&s>s ut)orit% to *u% t)e lnds on its *e)lf. 2ut it did not. Petitioner filed co"plint for rescission#declrtion of nullit% of contrct, recon&e%nce nd d"ges ginst respondents. An a!ton for re!on0e,an!e s one t$at see2s to transfer +ro+ert,, #ron*f%"", re*stere& 1, anot$er, to ts r*$tf%" an& "e*a" o#ner. In n ction for recon&e%nce, t)e certificte of title is respected s incontro&erti*le. =)t is soug)t insted is t)e trnsfer of t)e propert%, specificll% t)e title t)ereof, #$!$ $as 1een #ron*f%"", or erroneo%s", re*stere& n anot$er +erson3s na'e, to its rig)tful nd legl owner, or to one wit) *etter rig)t. To #arrant a re!on0e,an!e of t$e "an&, t$e fo""o#n* re)%stes '%st !on!%r < (1) t)e ction "ust *e *roug)t in t)e n"e of person cli"ing owners)ip or do"inicl rig)t o&er t)e lnd registered in t)e n"e of t)e defendnt? (2) t)e registrtion of t)e lnd in t)e n"e of t)e defendnt ws procured t)roug) frud or ot)er illegl "ens? (1) t)e propert% )s not %et pssed to n innocent purc)ser for &lue? nd (,) t)e ction is filed fter t)e certificte of title )d lred% *eco"e finl nd incontro&erti*le *ut #t$n fo%r ,ears fro" t)e disco&er% of t)e frud, or not "ater t$an 10 ,ears n t$e !ase of an '+"e& tr%st. Petitioner filed to s)ow t)e presence of t)ese re/uisites.