Republic of the Philippines

Land Registration Authority

Region 4
Batangas City

CONSULTA

Jinggoy Ehercito, petitioner, through counsel, Ronaldo Zamora, and

unto this honorable office respectfully submits this Consulta as follows;

Prefatory Statement

On January 4, 2015, Jinggoy Ehercito, the petitioner herein, filed with

the Register of Deeds of Tanauan City, Batangas, and an Adverse claim,
against the properties registered in the name of oppositor, JV Gomez, as
grounds for the adverse claim petitioner alleged that the parcel of land
registered under the name of Joseph Ejercito was fraudulently transferred to
JV Estrada. Jinggoy Ehercito is claiming that the Deed of Absolute Sale
executed by Joseph Ehercito in favor of JV Estrada was a forged document,
and claiming further that they acquired the subject property by succession,
he being sole heir of the said property.

Statement of Facts

On January 2, 2015, the petitioner herein went to the Assessors

Office at the Municapal Hall of Sto. Tomas, Batangas to pay for the real
property of the parcel of land withTransfer Certificates of Title Nos. T-6881
in the name of Joseph Ehercito , much to his surprise the same property has
been transferred to JV Estrada through a Deed of Absolute Sale dated
January 15, 2014. Joseph Estrada was the vendor and his thumb mark was
affixed in the deed of sale as substitute to his signature. Joseph Ehercito
passed away on February 15, 2014. The sole heir of Joseph Ehercito, is
claiming back the land, alleging that since it was sold under fraudulent
circumstances, no valid title passed to the buyer. On the other hand, the
buyer, JV Estrada claims who is now title holder of the subject parcel of
land, averred that he was a buyer in good faith and sought the protection
accorded to him under the law. On January 4, 2015, the Registrar of Deeds
of Tanauan City denied the registration of the Notice of Lis Pendens
Pursuant to Section 117 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, otherwise known
as the Property Registration:

Section 117 of the Property Registration Decree reads

Section 117. Procedure. When the Register of Deeds is in doubt with regard to the proper
 step to be taken or memorandum to be made in pursuance of any deed, mortgage or other
instrument presented to him for registration, or where any party in interest does not agree
with the action taken by the Register of Deeds with reference to any such instrument, the
question shall be submitted to the Commissioner of Land Registration by the Register of
Deeds, or by the party in interest thru the Register of Deeds. Where the instrument is
denied registration, the Register of Deeds shall notify the interested party in writing,
setting forth the defects of the instrument or legal grounds relied upon, and advising him
that if he is not agreeable to such ruling, he may, without withdrawing the documents
from the Registry, elevate the matter by consulta within five days from receipt of notice
of the denial of registration to the Commissioner of Land Registration.

The Register of Deeds shall make a memorandum of the pending consulta on the
certificate of title which shall be cancelled motu proprio by the Register of Deeds after
final resolution or decision thereof, or before resolution, if withdrawn by petitioner.

The Commissioner of Land Registration, considering the consulta and the records
certified to him after notice to the parties and hearing, shall enter an order prescribing the
step to be taken or memorandum to be made. His resolution or ruling in consultas shall be
conclusive and binding upon all Registers of Deeds, provided, that the party in interest
who disagrees with the final resolution, ruling or order of the Commissioner relative to
consultas may appeal to the Court of Appeals within the period and in manner provided
in Republic Act No. 5434.

ISSUE

Whether or not the Registry of Deed is correct in denying the annotation of

Lis Pendens.

Discussion/Arguments

A notice of lis pendens, which literally means "pending suit," may involve
actions that deal not only with the title or possession of a property, but even
with the use or occupation thereof.

Thus, Section 76 of PD 1529 reads:

Sec. 76. Notice of lis pendens. No action to recover possession of real estate, or to quiet title
thereto, or to remove clouds upon the title thereof, or for partition, or other proceedings of any
kind in court directly affecting the title to land or the use or occupation thereof or the buildings
thereon, and no judgment, and no proceeding to vacate or reverse any judgment, shall have any
effect upon registered land as against persons other than the parties thereto, unless a memorandum
or notice stating the institution of such action or proceeding and the court wherein the same is
pending, as well as the date of the institution thereof, together with a reference to the number of
the certificate of title, and an adequate description of the land affected and the registered owner
thereof, shall have been filed and registered.

In Magdalena Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, the Court

did not confine the availability of lis pendens to cases involving the title to
or possession of real property. Thus, it held:
 According to Section 24, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court and Section 76
of Presidential Decree No. 1529, 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.

In Villanueva v. Court of Appeals, this Court further declared that the rule
of lis pendens applied to suits brought "to establish an equitable estate,
interest, or right in specific real property or to enforce any lien, charge, or
encumbrance against it . . . ." Thus, this Court observed that the said notice
pertained to the following:
. . . all suits or actions which directly affect real property and not only those which involve the
question of title, but also those which are brought to establish an equitable estate, interest, or right,
in specific real property or to enforce any lien, charge, or encumbrance against it, there being in
some cases a lis pendens, although at the commencement of the suit there is no present vested
interest, claim, or lien in or on the property which it seeks to charge. It has also been held to apply
in the core of a proceeding to declare an absolute deed of mortgage, or to redeem from a
foreclosure sale, or to establish a trust, or to suits for the settlement and adjustment of partnership
interests.

The facts and circumstances of the case at bar lands in the

proper cases so that a notice of Lis pendens must be allowed.
It is also worth mentioning that LRA has the authority to rule
in Consultas.

" x x xNotice of Lis Pendens may only be annotated on existing or uncancelled certificate of title
which are registered in the names of those who are impleaded in the pending case. If it is desired
to have the Notice annotated, it must appear that the present registered owners are impleaded in
the pending case.

Prayer

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is hereby respectfully prayed

for from this Honorable Office that a Notice of Lis pendens be issued in
favor of the petitioner.

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Tanauan City, for Batangas City, March 5, 2016.

 Atty. Mando Rugas
UNIT 123 Penthouse Mansion
Ayala Ave.,Tanauan City, Batangas
PTR No. 14344
IBP No. 96030129 Feb. 14, 2014
Roll No. 110495 April 25, 2010
My Commission Expires on December 31, 2017
MCLE Compliance No. III-001234

properties in the name of Juanita R. Domingo, the same properties

have been included in the amended inventory of the estate of the late
Antonia Reyes Vda. de Domingo, filed by Elisa Domingo de Gabriel1 as
they are in fact properties acquired by the deceased during her lifetime. The
registration of the titles of these properties,; should have been made in the
name of said Antonia Reyes Vda. de Dominga, but due to commission of
fraud and deceit, by said Juanita R. Domingo, who was then living in the
same house with the deceased, all the titles of the above stated properties
were registered instead in her name, thus depriving herein adverse claimant
who is likewise an heir of Antonia Reyes Vda. de Domingo of her lawful
rights, interests and participations over said properties.