Posted by: Petros Absalon C. Bojo on 22 July 2018
FACTS:
Respondent, Pilar Estipular, filed a Petition for Reconstitution of Title before the Regional Trial Court. She declared that she was the only surviving legal heir of the late Fermin Estipular, who died intestate. Fermin, when he was alive, was issued a Certificate of Title by the Register of Deeds over a parcel of land. Said Certificate of Title, however, was either destroyed or burned as a result of the burning of the Register of Deeds of La Union during World War 2. As the land was already declared and distributed to ten persons who succeeded him, the herein respondent prayed that the said Certificate of Title be reconstituted.
The Regional Trial Court ordered that a Notice of Hearing be published for two successive issues of the Official Gazette and be posted at the main entrance of the Municipal building where the said property was located. Republic Act No. 26, however, requires that a petition for reconstitution of a lost or destroyed certificate of title must be posted at the main entrance of the provincial building as well, which was not complied with in the case at bar.
The Petition was granted by the RTC.
On appeal, the CA ruled that there was substantial compliance with the provisions of the law.
ISSUE: Whether or Not the Regional Trial Court acquired jurisdiction over the case through substantial compliance with the provisions of the law.
HELD:
Jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of the action is conferred only by the Constitution or by law. It cannot be (1) granted by the agreement of the parties; (2) acquired, waived, enlarged or diminished by any act or omission of the parties; or (3) conferred by the acquiescence of the courts. Republic Act No. 26 lays down the special requirements and procedure that must be followed before jurisdiction may be acquired over a petition for reconstitution of title. These requirements are mandatory and compliance with them is jurisdictional.
In Republic v. Court of Appeals, the Court held: "Reconstitution of a certificate of title, in the context of Republic Act No. 26, denotes the restoration in the original form and condition of a lost or destroyed instrument attesting [to] the title of a person to a piece of land. The purpose of the reconstitution is to have, after observing the procedures prescribed by law, the title reproduced in exactly the same way it has been when the loss or destruction occurred. Among the conditions explicitly required by the law is publication of the petition twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette, and its posting at the main entrance of the provincial building and of the municipal building of the municipality or city in which the land is situated, at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing. This directive is mandatory; indeed, its compliance has been held to be jurisdictional. x x x"
Thus, before the trial court can acquire jurisdiction to hear and decide a reconstitution case, compliance with the following requisites is imperative:
"1. [That] the notice of the petition be published, at the expense of the petitioner, twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette, and posted on the main entrance of the provincial building and of the municipal building of the municipality or city in which the land is situated, at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing;
"2. [That] the notice state among other things, the number of the lost or destroyed certificates of title if known, the name of the registered owner, the name of the occupants or persons in possession of the property, the owner of the adjoining properties and all other interested parties, the location, area and boundaries of the property, and the date on which all persons having any interest therein must appear and file their claim of objection to the petition;
"3. [That] a copy of the notice also be sent, by registered mail or otherwise, at the expense of the petitioner, to every person named therein (i.e. the occupants or persons in possession of the property, the owner of the adjoining properties and all other interested parties) whose address is known at least thirty days prior to the date of the hearing; and
"4. [That] at the hearing, petitioner submit proof of publication, posting and service of the notice as directed by the court."
In the present case, it is undisputed that the Notice of Hearing of respondents Petition for Reconstitution was not posted at the main entrance of the provincial building. Clearly, the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the case.
It must be emphasized that under the law, the publication of a notice of hearing in the Official Gazette is not enough. The posting of said notice at the main entrances of both the municipal and the provincial building is another equally vital requisite. The purposes of the stringent and mandatory character of the legal requirements of publication, posting, and mailing are to safeguard against spurious and unfounded land ownership claims, to apprise all interested parties of the existence of such action, and to give them enough time to intervene in the proceeding.
FACTS:
Respondent, Pilar Estipular, filed a Petition for Reconstitution of Title before the Regional Trial Court. She declared that she was the only surviving legal heir of the late Fermin Estipular, who died intestate. Fermin, when he was alive, was issued a Certificate of Title by the Register of Deeds over a parcel of land. Said Certificate of Title, however, was either destroyed or burned as a result of the burning of the Register of Deeds of La Union during World War 2. As the land was already declared and distributed to ten persons who succeeded him, the herein respondent prayed that the said Certificate of Title be reconstituted.
The Regional Trial Court ordered that a Notice of Hearing be published for two successive issues of the Official Gazette and be posted at the main entrance of the Municipal building where the said property was located. Republic Act No. 26, however, requires that a petition for reconstitution of a lost or destroyed certificate of title must be posted at the main entrance of the provincial building as well, which was not complied with in the case at bar.
The Petition was granted by the RTC.
On appeal, the CA ruled that there was substantial compliance with the provisions of the law.
ISSUE: Whether or Not the Regional Trial Court acquired jurisdiction over the case through substantial compliance with the provisions of the law.
HELD:
Jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of the action is conferred only by the Constitution or by law. It cannot be (1) granted by the agreement of the parties; (2) acquired, waived, enlarged or diminished by any act or omission of the parties; or (3) conferred by the acquiescence of the courts. Republic Act No. 26 lays down the special requirements and procedure that must be followed before jurisdiction may be acquired over a petition for reconstitution of title. These requirements are mandatory and compliance with them is jurisdictional.
In Republic v. Court of Appeals, the Court held: "Reconstitution of a certificate of title, in the context of Republic Act No. 26, denotes the restoration in the original form and condition of a lost or destroyed instrument attesting [to] the title of a person to a piece of land. The purpose of the reconstitution is to have, after observing the procedures prescribed by law, the title reproduced in exactly the same way it has been when the loss or destruction occurred. Among the conditions explicitly required by the law is publication of the petition twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette, and its posting at the main entrance of the provincial building and of the municipal building of the municipality or city in which the land is situated, at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing. This directive is mandatory; indeed, its compliance has been held to be jurisdictional. x x x"
Thus, before the trial court can acquire jurisdiction to hear and decide a reconstitution case, compliance with the following requisites is imperative:
"1. [That] the notice of the petition be published, at the expense of the petitioner, twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette, and posted on the main entrance of the provincial building and of the municipal building of the municipality or city in which the land is situated, at least thirty days prior to the date of hearing;
"2. [That] the notice state among other things, the number of the lost or destroyed certificates of title if known, the name of the registered owner, the name of the occupants or persons in possession of the property, the owner of the adjoining properties and all other interested parties, the location, area and boundaries of the property, and the date on which all persons having any interest therein must appear and file their claim of objection to the petition;
"3. [That] a copy of the notice also be sent, by registered mail or otherwise, at the expense of the petitioner, to every person named therein (i.e. the occupants or persons in possession of the property, the owner of the adjoining properties and all other interested parties) whose address is known at least thirty days prior to the date of the hearing; and
"4. [That] at the hearing, petitioner submit proof of publication, posting and service of the notice as directed by the court."
In the present case, it is undisputed that the Notice of Hearing of respondents Petition for Reconstitution was not posted at the main entrance of the provincial building. Clearly, the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the case.
It must be emphasized that under the law, the publication of a notice of hearing in the Official Gazette is not enough. The posting of said notice at the main entrances of both the municipal and the provincial building is another equally vital requisite. The purposes of the stringent and mandatory character of the legal requirements of publication, posting, and mailing are to safeguard against spurious and unfounded land ownership claims, to apprise all interested parties of the existence of such action, and to give them enough time to intervene in the proceeding.
