Sajonas v.
Court of Appeals before the Register of Deeds of Marikina and the same was
annotated at the back of TCT No. 79073.
(July 5, 1996)
On January 10, 1986, the Sajonas spouses demanded the
DOCTRINE: The annotation of the adverse claim is equivalent to cancellation of the notice of levy on execution upon Pilares.
notice to third persons of the interest of the claimant. The Despite said demand, Pilares refused to cause the cancellation of
provision of the law (PD 1529) that the adverse claim is only valid said annotation. Sajonas couple filed a complaint. The trial court
for 30 days cannot be upheld. To interpret the effectivity period of ruled in favor of Sajonas couple. On appeal, the CA reversed the
the adverse claim as absolute and without qualification limited to trial court‘s decision.
thirty days defeats the very purpose for which the statute provides
for the remedy of an inscription of adverse claim, as the ISSUES:
annotation of an adverse claim is a measure designed to protect
Which should be preferred between the notice of levy on execution
the interest of a person over a piece of real property where the
and the deed of absolute sale. The Deed of Absolute Sale was
registration of such interest or right is not otherwise provided for
executed on September 4, 1984, but was registered only on
by the Land Registration Act or Act 496 (now P.D. 1529 or the
August 28, 1985, while the notice of levy on execution was
Property Registration Decree), and serves as a warning to third
annotated six (6) months prior to the registration of the sale on
parties dealing with said property that someone is claiming an
February 12, 1985.
interest or the same or a better right than the registered owner
thereof.
HELD: Deed of sale prevails over the 2nd notice of adverse claim.
NATURE: Petition for review on certiorari
PONENTE: Torres, J. RATIO/RULING:
FACTS: The annotation of the adverse claim is equivalent to notice to third
persons of the interest of the claimant. The provision of the law
Spouses Uychocde sold on installment basis a parcel of residential
(PD 1529) that the adverse claim is only valid for 30 days cannot
land registered in their names (TCT No. N-79073) to spouses
be upheld. Clearly, the intention of the law is otherwise as may be
Alfredo and Conchita Sajonas as evidenced by a Contract of Sale
gleaned on the following discussion:
dated September 22, 1983. Sajonas couple caused the annotation
Sec. 70 Adverse Claim- Whoever claims any part or
of an adverse claim based on the said Contract to Sell on the title
interest in registered land adverse to the registered
of the subject property on August 27, 1984. Upon full payment,
owner, arising subsequent to the date of the original
the Uychocdes executed a Deed of Sale involving the property in
registration, may, if no other provision is made in this
question in favor of the Sajonas couple on September 4, 1984. The
decree for registering the same, make a statement in
deed of absolute sale was registered only August 28, 1985.
writing setting forth fully his alleged right or interest, and
Meanwhile, Ernesto had a monetary obligation to Domingo Pilares.
how or under whom acquired, a reference to the number
Ernesto agreed to pay within two years from June 25, 1980, the
of certificate of title of the registered owner, the name of
same date when they entered a compromise agreement. When
the registered owner, and a description of the land in
Ernesto failed to comply, Domingo sought an issuance of a writ of
which the right or interest is claimed.
execution enforcing the agreement which the Court granted on
The statement shall be signed and sworn to, and shall
August 3, 1982. A notice of levy on execution was issued on
state the adverse claimant’s residence, and a place at
February 12, 1985. On the same day, defendant sheriff Roberto
which all notices may be served upon him. This statement
Garcia of Quezon City presented said notice of levy on execution
shall be entitled to registration as an adverse claim on the
certificate of title. The adverse claim shall be effective for a
period of thirty days from the date of registration. After DISPOSITION: Petition was granted. The inscription of the notice
the lapse of said period, the annotation of adverse claim of levy on execution on TCT No. N-109417 is ordered CANCELLED.
may be cancelled upon filing of a verified petition therefor
by the party in interest: Provided, however, that after VOTE:2nd Division. Regalado, Romero, Puno and Mendoza concur.
cancellation, no second adverse claim based on the same
ground shall be registered by the same claimant.
CONCURRING/DISSENTING OPINION: none.
Before the lapse of thirty days aforesaid, any party in interest may
file a petition in the Court of First Instance where the land is
situated for the cancellation of the adverse claim, and the court
shall grant a speedy hearing upon the question of the validity of
such adverse claim, and shall render judgment as may be just and
equitable. If the adverse claim is adjudged to be invalid, the
registration thereof shall be ordered cancelled. If, in any case, the
court, after notice and hearing shall find that the adverse claim
thus registered was frivolous, it may fine the claimant in an
amount not less than one thousand pesos, nor more than five
thousand pesos, in its discretion. Before the lapse of thirty days,
the claimant may withdraw his adverse claim by filing with the
Register of Deeds a sworn petition to that effect.
Construing the provision as a whole would reconcile the apparent
inconsistency between the portions of the law such that the
provision on cancellation of adverse claim by verified petition
would serve to qualify the provision on the effectivity period. The
law, taken together, simply means that the cancellation of the
adverse claim is still necessary to render it ineffective, otherwise,
the inscription will remain annotated and shall continue as a lien
upon the property. For if the adverse claim has already ceased to
be effective upon the lapse of said period, its cancellation is no
longer necessary and the process of cancellation would be a
useless ceremony.
To interpret the effectivity period of the adverse claim as absolute
and without qualification limited to thirty days defeats the very
purpose for which the statute provides for the remedy of an
inscription of adverse claim, as the annotation of an adverse claim
is a measure designed to protect the interest of a person over a
piece of real property where the registration of such interest or
right is not otherwise provided for by the Land Registration Act or
Act 496 (now P.D. 1529 or the Property Registration Decree), and
serves as a warning to third parties dealing with said property that
someone is claiming an interest or the same or a better right than
the registered owner thereof.
