Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 68 views

    Casimiro Development Corporation vs. Renato L. Mateo

    Uploaded by

    Raymarc Elizer Asuncion
    CDC purchased land from China Bank in 1988 that was previously owned by Mateo's mother. China Bank foreclosed on a mortgage from the land's previous owner and was issued a clean title. Mateo claimed CDC knew his siblings possessed the land, making the purchase invalid. However, the court held that under the Torrens system, a purchaser can rely solely on the title certificate, which showed China Bank as the owner. Possession as agricultural tenants does not constitute an adverse claim of ownership. Therefore, as CDC paid fair price, it was deemed an innocent purchaser for value and its title to the land was upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Casimiro Development Corporation vs. Renato L. Mateo

    Uploaded by

    Raymarc Elizer Asuncion
    68 views1 page
    CDC purchased land from China Bank in 1988 that was previously owned by Mateo's mother. China Bank foreclosed on a mortgage from the land's previous owner and was issued a clean title. Mateo claimed CDC knew his siblings possessed the land, making the purchase invalid. However, the court held that under the Torrens system, a purchaser can rely solely on the title certificate, which showed China Bank as the owner. Possession as agricultural tenants does not constitute an adverse claim of ownership. Therefore, as CDC paid fair price, it was deemed an innocent purchaser for value and its title to the land was upheld.

    Original Description:

    CORPORATION LAW

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    CDC purchased land from China Bank in 1988 that was previously owned by Mateo's mother. China Bank foreclosed on a mortgage from the land's previous owner and was issued a clean title. Mateo claimed CDC knew his siblings possessed the land, making the purchase invalid. However, the court held that under the Torrens system, a purchaser can rely solely on the title certificate, which showed China Bank as the owner. Possession as agricultural tenants does not constitute an adverse claim of ownership. Therefore, as CDC paid fair price, it was deemed an innocent purchaser for value and its title to the land was upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    68 views1 page

    Casimiro Development Corporation vs. Renato L. Mateo

    Uploaded by

    Raymarc Elizer Asuncion
    CDC purchased land from China Bank in 1988 that was previously owned by Mateo's mother. China Bank foreclosed on a mortgage from the land's previous owner and was issued a clean title. Mateo claimed CDC knew his siblings possessed the land, making the purchase invalid. However, the court held that under the Torrens system, a purchaser can rely solely on the title certificate, which showed China Bank as the owner. Possession as agricultural tenants does not constitute an adverse claim of ownership. Therefore, as CDC paid fair price, it was deemed an innocent purchaser for value and its title to the land was upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    G.R. No.

    175485, July 17, 2011

    Casimiro Development Corporation vs. Renato L. Mateo

    FACTS:

    In 1988, petitioner purchased from China Bank the land in question which was previously sold
    by the mother of Mateo to Rodolfo Pe who in turn constituted a mortgage on the property in
    favor of China Bank as security for a loan. China Bank foreclosed the mortgage and consolidated
    its ownership of the property after Rodolfo failed to redeem. A TCT was issued in the name of
    China Bank. In 1991, CDC brought an action for unlawful detainer against the respondent’s
    siblings. Respondent counters that CDC acquired the property from China Bank in bad faith
    because it had actual knowledge of the possession of the property by the respondent and his
    siblings.

    ISSUE:

    WON CDC was an innocent purchaser for value.

    HELD:

    One who deals with property registered under the Torrens system need not go beyond the
    certificate of title, but only has to rely on the certificate of title. He is charged with notice only
    of such burdens and claims as are annotated on the title. China Bank’s TCT’s was a clean title,
    that is, it was free from any lien or encumbrance, CDC had the right to rely, when it purchased
    the property, solely upon the face of the certificate of title in the name of China Bank. The
    respondent’s siblings’ possession did not translate to an adverse claim of ownership. They even
    characterized their possession only as that of mere agricultural tenants. Under no law was
    possession grounded on tenancy a status that might create a defect or inflict a law in the title of
    the owner. CDC having paid the full and fair price of the land, was an innocent purchaser for
    value. The TCT in the name of CDC was declared valid and subsisting.

    You might also like