LOZADA v.

BRACEWELL
(G.R. NO. 179155, APRIL 2, 2014)
FACTS:
Petitioner filed an application for registration and confirmation of title over a parcel of
land covered by Plan PSU-129514, which was granted on February 23, 1989 by the RTC of
Makati City, acting as a land registration court. Consequently, the LRA issued Decree No. N-
217036 in the name of petitioner, who later obtained OCT No. 0-78 covering the said parcel of
land.
Within a year from the issuance of the aforementioned decree, Bracewell filed a petition
for review of a decree of registration before the RTC of Las Piñas City, claiming that a portion of
the subject lot – of which he is the absolute owner and possessor – is fraudulently included in
Decree No. N-217036.
Finding that petitioner obtained Decree in bad faith, the Las Piñas City-RTC rendered a
Decision in favor of Bracewell and faulted petitioner for deliberately preventing respondents
from participating and objecting to his application for registration when the documentary
evidence showed that, as early as 1962, Bracewell had been paying taxes for the subject lot;
and that he (Bracewell) was recognized as the owner thereof in the records of the Bureau of
Lands way back in 1965, as well as in the City Assessor’s Office. Petitioner argues that the Las
Piñas City-RTC had no jurisdiction over a petition for review of a decree of registration under
Section 32 of PD 1529, which should be filed in the same branch of the court that rendered the
decision and ordered the issuance of the decree.
The CA held that, since the petition for review was filed within one (1) year from the
issuance of the questioned decree, and considering that the subject lot is located in Las Piñas
City, the RTC of said city had jurisdiction over the case.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the Las Piñas City-RTC has jurisdiction over the petition for review of
Decree, which was issued as a result of the judgment rendered by the RTC of Makati
City.
RULING:
YES. Since the land is situated in Las Piñas, it is proper that the cancellation of the
decree was filed before RTC Las Piñas.
Under Act No. 49631 (Act 496), or the "Land Registration Act," as amended, – which was
the law in force at the time of the commencement by both parties of their respective
registration proceedings – jurisdiction over all applications for registration of title was conferred
upon the Courts of First Instance (CFIs, now RTCs) of the respective provinces in which the land
sought to be registered is situated.
The land registration laws were updated and codified under PD 1529, which took effect
on January 23, 1979, and under Section 17 thereof, jurisdiction over an application for land
registration is still vested on the CFI (now, RTC) of the province or city where the land is
situated.
The explanation that when petitioner filed his land registration case in December 1976,
jurisdiction over applications for registration of property situated in Las Piñas City was vested in
the RTC of Makati City in view of the fact that there were no RTC branches yet in the Las Piñas
City at that time. Bracewell’s own application over the lots, all situated in Las Piñas City, was
thus granted by the RTC of Makati City, Branch 58.
Subsequently, Batas Pambansa Bilang (BP) 129, otherwise known as "The Judiciary
Reorganization Act of 1980," was enacted and took effect on August 14, 1981, authorizing the
creation of RTCs in different judicial regions, including the RTC of Las Piñas City as part of the
National Capital Judicial Region. As pointed out by the court a quo in its Decision dated July 31,
2003, the RTC of Las Piñas City was established "in or about 1994." Understandably, in February
1998, Bracewell sought the review of Decree No. N-217036 before the Las Piñas City-RTC,
considering that the lot subject of this case is situated in Las Piñas City.
It should be pointed out that with the passage of PD 1529, the distinction between the
general jurisdiction vested in the RTC and the limited jurisdiction conferred upon it as a
cadastral court was eliminated. RTCs now have the power to hear and determine all questions,
even contentious and substantial ones, arising from applications for original registration of titles
to lands and petitions filed after such registration. Accordingly, and considering further that the
matter of whether the RTC resolves an issue in the exercise of its general jurisdiction or of its
limited jurisdiction as a special court is only a matter of procedure and has nothing to do with
the question of jurisdiction, petitioner cannot now rely on the Joson pronouncement to
advance its theory.
Section 32 of PD 1529 provides that the review of a decree of registration falls within
the jurisdiction of and, hence, should be filed in the "proper Court of First Instance.
Since the LRA’s issuance of a decree of registration only proceeds from the land registration
court’s directive, a petition taken under Section 32 of PD 1529 is effectively a review of the land
registration court’s ruling. As such, case law instructs that for "as long as a final decree has not
been entered by the [LRA] and the period of one (1) year has not elapsed from the date of entry
of such decree, the title is not finally adjudicated and the decision in the registration proceeding
continues to be under the control and sound discretion of the court rendering it."
While it is indeed undisputed that it was the RTC of Makati City, Branch 134 which
rendered the decision directing the LRA to issue Decree No. N-217036, and should, applying the
general rule as above-stated, be the same court before which a petition for the review of
Decree No. N-217036 is filed, the Court must consider the circumstantial milieu in this case
that, in the interest of orderly procedure, warrants the filing of the said petition before the Las
Piñas City-RTC.
Particularly, the Court refers to the fact that the application for original registration in
this case was only filed before the RTC of Makati City, Branch 134 because, during that time,
i.e., December 1976, Las Piñas City had no RTC. Barring this situation, the aforesaid application
should not have been filed before the RTC of Makati City, Branch 134 pursuant to the rules on
venue prevailing at that time. Under Section 2, Rule 4 of the 1964 Revised Rules of Court, which
took effect on January 1, 1964, the proper venue for real actions, such as an application for
original registration, lies with the CFI of the province where the property is situated.
As the land subject of this case is undeniably situated in Las Piñas City, the application
for its original registration should have been filed before the Las Piñas City-RTC were it not for
the fact that the said court had yet to be created at the time the application was filed. Be that
as it may, and considering further that the complication at hand is actually one of venue and
not of jurisdiction (given that RTCs do retain jurisdiction over review of registration decree
cases pursuant to Section 32 of PD 1529), the Court, cognizant of the peculiarity of the
situation, holds that the Las Piñas City-RTC has the authority over the petition for the review of
Decree No. N-217036 filed in this case.
Indeed, the filing of the petition for review before the Las Piñas City-RTC was only but a
rectificatory implementation of the rules of procedure then-existing, which was temporarily set
back only because of past exigencies. In light of the circumstances now prevailing, the Court
perceives no compelling reason to deviate from applying the rightful procedure. After all, venue
is only a matter of procedure and, hence, should succumb to the greater interests of the orderly
administration of justice.