Remedies Treasurer of the Philippines vs Court of Appeals GR NO. L-42805; 31 August 1987 TREASURER OF THE PHILIPPINES !OURT OF APPEALS AN" SPOUSES E"UAR"O O!SON AN" s NORA E. O!SON
Pone nte Facts
Cruz, J. •
•
•
•
•
Issue Held Rulin g
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lawaan Lopez ofered ofered to sell to private respondents a land in QC. However, the sale was deerred because Lopez Lopez said his certicate o title had been burned in his house and he would have to le a petition with CFI QC or a duplicate certicate o title. etition was !ranted ater hearin! without an" opposition causin! issuance o new duplicate certicate o title. private respondents respondents paid Lopez purchase price ph #$,%&& #$,%&& in ull, then 'C' 'C' was issued to the(. the(. ) "ears later, a wo(an clai(in! to be the real Lawaan Lopez, led a petition to declare null and void the transer o her land in avor o private respondents on the !round that it had been (ade b" an i(postor i (postor.. Court !ranted annul(ent o certicate o title. Lopez appealed clai(in! that private deendants should have been re*uired to pa" da(a!es to her and the costs. +is(issed because there was no collusion between private respondents and i(postor. rivate respondents led a co(plaint a!ainst i(postor Lopez and treasurer o the hilippines as custodian o ssurance und or da(a!es d a(a!es sustained b" plaintifs. 'rial 'rial court and C held ssurance Fund subsidiaril" liable or -$,)/0. 123 'reasurer o the hlippines is liable. 3o. etition 4ranted. 5ecover" 5ecover" o da(a!es ro( ssurance Fund not allowed in case at bar. bar. 'he rst situation is clearl" inapplicable as we are not dealin! here with an" o(ission, (ista6e or (aleasance o the cler6 o court or o the re!ister o deeds or his personnel in the peror(ance o their duties. 'he second situation is also inapplicable. 'he stron!est obstacle to recover" thereunder is that the private respondents ac*uired no land or an" interest therein as a result o the invalid sale (ade to the( b" the spurious Lawaan Lopez. 7aniestl", the deception i(posed upon the( b" the i(postor deprived the private respondents o the (one" the" delivered to hi( as consideration or the sale. 8ut there is no *uestion that the subse*uent cancellation o the sale did not deprive the( o the land sub9ect thereo, or o an" interest therein, or the" never ac*uired ownership over it in the rst place. the real Lawaan Lopez had her own !enuine certicate o title all the ti(e and it re(ained valid despite the issuance o the new certicate o title in the na(e o the private respondents. 'hat new certicate, as the trial court correctl" declared, was null and void ab initio, which (eans that it had no le!al efect whatsoever and at an" ti(e. 'he private respondents were were not or a sin!le (o(ent the owner o the propert" in *uestion and so cannot clai( to have been unlawull" deprived thereo when their certicate o title was ound and declared to be a total nullit". 5espondents 5espondents cannot clai( the status o innocent pu rchasers o the land or such ailure to e:ercise e:ercise the necessar" dili!ence, and the" never ac*uired an" title to the land or an" interest therein. 5espondents 5espondents bein! neither the re!istered owners nor innocent purchasers, the" are not entitled to recover ro( the ssurance Fund. 5e(ed" o respondents respondents is to proceed a!ainst the i(postor in a civil action or recover" and da(a!es or prosecute hi( under the 5evised enal Code.
5ecover" ro( ssurance Fund could be de(anded b"; -. n" person person who sustains sustains loss or da(a!e da(a!e under the ollowin! ollowin! conditio conditions; ns;
and
provisions o the ropert" 5e!istration +ecree> or b" the re!istration b" an" other persons as owner o such land> or b" (ista6e, o(ission or (isdescription in an" certicate or owner?s duplicate, or in an" entr" or (e(orandu( in the re!ister or other o@cial boo6, or b" an" cancellation> and