Heirs of Lopez V Enriquez

FIRST DIVISION [G.R. No. 146262. January 21, 2005.
]
HEIRS OF EUGENIO LOPEZ, SR., petitioners,
vs.
HON. ALFREDO R. ENRIQUEZ, in his capacity as Administrator of the Land
Registration Authority and the REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MARIKINA CITY, respondents.
CARPIO, J p:
FACTS
Alfonso Sandoval ("Sandoval") and Roman Ozaeta, Jr. ("Ozaeta") filed an application for
registration of title before the RTC of Pasig City, Branch 152 (land registration court) who granted the
same on 31 May 1966 and issued certificate of finality on 8 March 1991.
The National Land Titles and Deeds Administration (now LRA) issued on 20 October 1977
Decree Nos. N-217643 and N-217644 in the names of Sandoval and his wife Rosa Ruiz, and Ozaeta
and his wife Ma. Salome Lao.
Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. (Petitioners) filed on 16 July 1997 a motion in LRC No. N-

18887; alleged that Sandoval and Ozaeta sold the lots subject of the application to the late
Eugenio Lopez, Sr. on 23 September 1970; prayed that the court consider in the land registration
case the DOAS over the lots executed by Sandoval and Ozaeta and their respective spouses in
favor of Eugenio Lopez, Sr.; also prayed that the court issue the decree of registration in their
names as the successors-in-interest of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. invoking Section 22 of P.D. No. 1529
RTC of Pasig City, Branch 152 (the land registration court) gave due course to the motion
and conducted hearings.
The Register of Deeds of Marikina City issued the corresponding OCT Nos. O-1603 and O-
1604 in favor of Sandoval and Ozaeta and their spouses only on 18 August 1998.
Petitioners filed on 25 November 1998 an application to annotate the notice of lis pendens at

the back of OCT Nos. O-1603 and O-1604 on the ground that petitioners have filed with the land
registration court a motion to declare OCT Nos. O-1603 and O-1604 void with the
Register of Deeds of Marikina City who denied the same in a letter dated 15 December 1998.
Petitioners elevated on 14 January 1999 to the LRA who agreed with the Register of Deeds;
filed a petition for review of the LRA’s decision before the appellate court who dismissed the petition
for lack of merit.
ISSUE: W/N Petitioner has the right to file an application to annotate the notice of lis
pendens.
HELD
The Register of Deeds denied registration of the notice of lis pendens because "the application
was bereft of the original petition or complaint upon which this office will base its action."
In consulta to the LRA, petitioners pointed out that they have complied with the requirements for the
registration of the notice of lis pendens.
Petitioners' enumeration readily reveals that they have not complied with the requisites. Both
the LRA and the appellate court denied the application for a notice of lis pendens because petitioners
are mere movants, and not original parties, in LRC No. N-18887. As petitioners are not parties to an
action as contemplated in Section 76 of PD 1529, they failed to present the requisite pleading to the
Register of Deeds of Marikina City. We hold that the Register of Deeds correctly denied the
application for a notice of lis pendens.
Lis pendens literally means a pending suit. The doctrine of lis pendens refers to the

jurisdiction, power or control which a court acquires over property involved in a suit, pending the
continuance of the action, and until final judgment. The purposes of lis pendens are (1) to protect the
rights of the party causing the registration of the lis pendens, and (2) to advise third persons who
purchase or contract on the subject property that they do so at their peril and subject to the
result of the pending litigation.
The filing of a notice of lis pendens has a two-fold effect. First, it keeps the subject
matter of the litigation within the power of the court until the entry of the final judgment to prevent the
defeat of the final judgment by successive alienations. Second, it binds a purchaser, bona fide or
not, of the land subject of the litigation to the judgment or decree that the court will promulgate
subsequently. However, the filing of a notice of lis pendens does not create a right or lien that
previously did not exist.
Without a notice of lis pendens, a third party who acquires the property after relying only on the
certificate of title is a purchaser in good faith. Against such third party, the supposed rights of a litigant
cannot prevail, because the former is not bound by the property owner's undertakings not annotated
in the transfer certificate of title.
A notice of lis pendens may involve actions that deal not only with title or possession of a
property, but also with the use or occupation of a property. The litigation must directly involve a
specific property which is necessarily affected by the judgment.
Magdalena Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals enumerated the cases where a

notice of lis pendens is appropriate:
[A] notice of lis pendens is proper in the following cases, viz:

a) An action to recover possession of real estate;
b) An action to quiet title thereto;
c) An action to remove clouds thereon;
d) An action for partition; and
e) Any other proceedings of any kind in Court directly affecting the title to the land or
the use or occupation thereof or the buildings thereon.
On the other hand, the doctrine of lis pendens has no application in the following cases:
a) Preliminary attachments;
b) Proceedings for the probate of wills;
c) Levies on execution;
d) Proceedings for administration of estate of deceased persons; and
e) Proceedings in which the only object is the recovery of a money judgment.
As decreed by Section 76 of PD 1529, a notice of lis pendens should contain a statement of the

institution of an action or proceeding, the court where the same is pending, and the date of its
institution.
A notice of lis pendens should also contain a reference to the number of the
certificate of title of the land, an adequate description of the land affected and its registered
owner.

Heirs of Lopez V Enriquez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heirs of Lopez V Enriquez

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heirs of Lopez V Enriquez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FIRST DIVISION [G.R. No. 146262. January 21, 2005.

Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. (Petitioners) filed on 16 July 1997 a motion in LRC No. N-

Petitioners filed on 25 November 1998 an application to annotate the notice of lis pendens at

Lis pendens literally means a pending suit. The doctrine of lis pendens refers to the

Magdalena Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals enumerated the cases where a

[A] notice of lis pendens is proper in the following cases, viz:

As decreed by Section 76 of PD 1529, a notice of lis pendens should contain a statement of the

You might also like