[ G.R. No. 5599. March 22, 1910 ] 16 Phil. 84
[ G.R. No. 5599. March 22, 1910 ]
MAURICE F. LOEWENSTEIN, PLAINTIFF, VS. H. C. PAGE, REGISTRAR OF DEEDS OF THE SUBPROVINCE OF BENGUET, DEFENDANT. D E C I S I O N
JOHNSON, J.:
An original action in this court for the writ of mandamus against the defendant to compel him to register a certain certificate of title in accordance with the provisions of section 122 of Act No. 496 of the Philippine Commission. The petition presented by the plaintiff is as follows:
“1. That plaintiff is a citizen of the United States of America, of age, and a resident of the city of Manila, Philippine Islands; that defendant is, and at all times herein referred to has been, an officer of the Government of the Philippine Islands, to wit, the acting register of deeds of the subprovince of Benguet, and is a resident of the municipality of Baguio in said subprovince. “II. That plaintiff, in accordance with the laws of the Philippine Islands, has located a mineral claim on public and unoccupied land in the barrio of Bua, municipality of Itogon, subprovince of Benguet, has complied with all the requirements of law precedent to the issue of a patent in favor of plaintiff, and that a patent for the said mineral claim has been issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands for said mineral claim in the name of plaintiff and filed by the official who issued said patent with defendant as register of deeds of the subdivision of Benguet; that the said mineral claim is known and recorded as the ‘Ultimo Mineral Claim,’ and is fully and adequately described in the aforesaid patent. “III. That plaintiff has paid to defendant P6, Philippine currency, as fees for the issue of a certificate of title in favor of plaintiff for the aforesaid mineral claim in accordance with the aforesaid patent, and has demanded of defendant that the latter issue such certificate; that defendant neglects and refuses to issue such certificate, unless and until plaintiff shall pay to defendant one-tenth of one per cent of the value of plaintiff’s aforesaid mineral claim for an assurance fund and shall file with defendant sworn declarations of three disinterested persons that the value fixed by plaintiff is fair; that plaintiff has refused to pay any sum whatever for an assurance fund and has refused to file such sworn declarations or to fix a value, and upon such refusal has again demanded of defendant that he issue a certificate as aforesaid; that defendant thereupon refused and continues to refuse and neglect to issue to plaintiff a certificate of title for the mineral claim aforesaid. “IV. That plaintiff has no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary courts of law, other than a writ of mandate to be issued to defendant commanding him forthwith to enter a certificate of title in the name of plaintiff for the aforesaid mineral claim and issue an owner’s duplicate certificate therefor to plaintiff. “Wherefore, plaintiff prays that judgment be entered granting a peremptory order against defendant, commanding him, immediately after the receipt of such order, to enter a certificate of title in accordance with the provisions of section 122 of Act No. 496 in the name of plaintiff for the ‘Ultimo Mineral Claim,’ as described in the patent issued in plaintiff’s name by the Government of the Philippine Islands, and to issue an owner’s duplicate thereof to, plaintiff; and plaintiff further prays that he be given judgment against defendant for his costs herein.”
To this petition the defendant presented a demurrer, basing the same upon the following reasons:
“1. Because it appears from the complaint that the plaintiff has not done all that is required by the provisions of the Land Registration Act to entitle him to demand the, registration of the patent and the entry of a certificate of title and the issuance of an owner’s duplicate certificate under section 122 of said Act. “2. Because it appears from the complaint that the plaintiff has refused to pay the one-tenth of one per centum of the fair value of the land or any sum whatever for the assurance fund, which by section 99 of said Land Registration Act, as amended, is expressly made .payable to the register of deeds upon the original registration of any land under said Act. “3. Because it does not appear from the complaint that the defendant has unlawfully neglected or refused to perform any act which the law specially enjoins as a duty resulting from his office as register of deeds, or that he has unlawfully excluded the plaintiff from the use and enjoyment of any right to which he is entitled, and it does not appear that the duty is specially enjoined upon the register of deeds to register a patent to public land and enter a certificate of title thereto and issue an owner’s duplicate certificate without the payment to him of the one-tenth of one per centum of the assessed or fair value of the real estate at the time of such original registration.”
The petitioner claims that he has complied with all the requirements of law precedent to the issuance of a patent in his favor and that a patent for a mineral claim has been issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands to the plaintiff and has been filed by the official who issued said patent with the defendant as register of deeds of the subprovince of Benguet. This patent was filed with the register of deeds of the subprovince of Benguet for registration in accordance with the provisions of section 122 of Act No. 496. It is alleged by the petitioner that the register of deeds refused to register such patent unless and until he should pay the fee provided for in section 99 of Act No. 496. The question presented to the court by the demurrer is whether or not it is the plain and specific duty of the register of deeds to register said patent without demanding the fee provided for in section 99 of said Act No. 496. Section 37 of the Act of Congress of July 1,1902, provides how persons, associations, or corporations may secure patents to mineral claims. Section 122 of Act No. 496 (which Act is known as the Act providing for the registration of lands under the Torrens system) provides that “Wherever public lands in the Philippine Islands belonging to the Government of the United States or to the Government of the Philippine Islands are alienated, granted, or conveyed to persons or to public or private corporations, the same shall be brought forthwith under the operation of this Act and shall become registered lands.” Section 73 of Act No. 926 provides that patents to public lands shall be issued “in the name of the United States and the Philippine Government under the signature of the Civil Governor; but such patents (patents to public lands) or certificates shall be effective only for the purposes defined in section 122 of the Land Registration Act (No. 496), and the actual conveyance of the land shall be effected only as provided in said section.” That part of section 122 (Act No. 496) to which said section 73 (Act No. 926) refers is as follows:
“The deed, grant, or instrument of conveyance from the Government to the grantee shall not take effect as a conveyance or bind the land, but shall operate only as a contract between the Government and the grantee and as evidence of authority to the clerk or register of deeds to make registration. The act of registration shall be the operative act to convey and affect the lands, and in all cases under this Act (No. 496) registration shall be made in the office of the register of deeds for the province where the land lies. The fees for registration shall be paid by the grantee. After due registration and issue of the certificate and ‘Owner’s duplicate,’ such land shall be registered land for all purposes under this Act.”
The petitioner contends that the only fee for registration which he is required to pay is the fee of $3 (P6) provided for in section 114 of Act No. 496. The respondent contends that all patents and certificates granting “public lands” issued by the Government of the United States or the Government of the Philippine Islands, in order to be registered in accordance with the provisions of section 122 (Act No. 496), the holder thereof must pay the fee provided for in section 99 of said Act. Act No. 496 of the Philippine Commission provides for a system of registration of land titles under a system popularly known as the “Torrens system.” Said Act provides for the registration of titles to lands held by individuals, or, in other words, the registration of titles to lands which have already been granted by the State to private persons. Section 19 provides who may make application for registration of title. Section 21, as amended by Act No. 809, provides the form of application. Sections 29 and 41 provide for the registration or recording of the decree of the court granting the registration of the title under said Act. Section 99 provides that in the original registration or recording (meaning simply the first registration under the “Torrens system”) that there shall be paid to the register of deeds one-tenth of 1 per cent of the assessed value of the real estate, on the basis of the last assessment for municipal taxation, as an assurance fund. Act No. 700 of the Philippine Commission provides for the method of ascertaining the value of the land, in case the same has not been theretofore assessed for taxation. Act No. 926 of the Philippine Commission provides for the issuing of patents to public lands in six different cases, as follows: First. Sections 1 to 9, for patents to homesteads on the public domain. Second. Sections 10 to 21, for sales of portions of the public domain. Third. Sections 22 to 31, for leases of portions of the public domain. Fourth. Sections 32 to 35, for free patents to individual settlers on portions of the public domain. Fifth. Sections 36 to 53, for the reservation of town sites. Sixth. Sections 54 to 67, for unperfected titles and Spanish grants and concessions of the public domain. In each of the above grants or patents issued in accordance with the provisions applicable thereto no provision whatever is made for the payment of a fee for the registration of the patent, except under the patent granted for unperfected titles and Spanish grants and concessions of the public domain, where, in section 57 (Act No. 926), we find this provision:
“The fees provided to be paid for the registration of lands under the Land Registration Act (No. 496) shall be collected from applicants under this chapter, except that upon the original registration of the land claimed hereunder no fee shall be required for the assurance fund.”
We believe that this exception is significant of the fact that it was the intention of the lawmaking body to require the payment of the fees for the registration of patents to public lands issued under the provisions of said Act No. 926. This view is emphasized by the fact that section 122 (Act No. 496) expressly provides that all patents to public lands shall be brought forthwith under the provisions of the Act providing for the registration of the land under the “Torrens system.” Had it been the intention of the law- making body - as the petitioner claims - not to require the payment of one-tenth of 1 per cent by the holder of a patent to public land for the registration of the same, then why did the Commission expressly relieve the holder of a patent to a portion of the public domain (of unperfected titles and Spanish grants and concessions) from the payment of this fee, when at the same time they had brought all patents to public lands under the provisions of Act No. 496? It will be noted by comparing section 41 of Act No. 496 with section 122 of the same Act, the former relating to the registration of titles to private lands and the latter to the registration of public lands, that the procedure, after the decree, in the first instance, is granted by the court, and the patent, in the second, by the Governor (see section 73, Act No. 926) is substantially the same. It is as follows. Section 41 provides “Immediately upon the entry of the decree of registration the clerk shall send a certified copy thereof, under the seal of the court, to the register of deeds for the province, or provinces, or city in which the land lies, and the register of deeds shall transcribe the decree in a book to be called the ‘Registration Book,’ * * *. The entry made by the register of deeds in this book in each case shall be the original certificate of title, and shall be signed by him and sealed with the seal of the court. * * * The register of deeds shall in each case make an exact duplicate of the original certificate, including the seal, but putting on it the words ‘Owner’s duplicate certificate,’ and deliver the same to the owner or to his attorney duly authorized.” Section 122 in part provides “It shall be the duty of the official (the Governor-General) issuing the instrument of alienation, grant, or conveyance in behalf of the Government to cause such instrument, before its delivery to the grantee, to be filed with the register of deeds for the province where the land lies and to be there registered like other deeds and conveyances, whereupon a certificate shall be entered as in other cases of registered land, and an ‘Owner’s duplicate certificate’ issued to the grantee.” It will be noted also that section 122 provides that this patent, “before its delivery to the grantee,” shall be filed with the register of deeds * * * “to be there registered like other deeds and conveyances.” What does the phrase “like other deeds and conveyances,” when applied to these patents and the registration of the same, mean? It can only mean titles issued under said Act No. 496. It can not be construed to apply to titles given or executed between private parties, for the reason that registration under the “Torrens system” makes no effort to change the method of transferring or registering titles granted by or to private persons, nor for the issuance of an “Owner’s duplicate certificate.” It will be noted further that after the patent is filed with the register of deeds for the proper province, that a certificate shall be entered as in other cases of registered land, and an “Owner’s duplicate certificate” issued to the grantee. This provision of said section 122 shows clearly that the phrase in said section “to be there registered like other deeds and conveyances” must necessarily refer to “other deeds and conveyances issued in accordance with the provisions of law granting ‘Torrens titles.’” All these Acts must be construed together. If we were to construe section 41 alone (Act No. 496) we might conclude that the register of property would be compelled to register a private title or a title to private lands granted under said Act without the collection of any fee or fees whatever. This section, read alone, seems to be mandatory in its terms. It says nothing about the collection of fees; yet no one contends that the fees provided for in section 99 of said Act must not be paid before the owner of the “original title” is entitled to the certificate. Section 122 provides that the register of deeds must collect the fees. To what does the word “fees” apply? Section 57 of Act No. 926 says that the fees provided for the registration of lands, under the Land Registration Act, shall be collected from the applicants, except that no fee shall be required for an assurance fund. Section 114 of Act No. 496 as amended by section 7 of Act No. 1648, as well as by section 11 of Act No. 1699, provides what fees shall be collected in the course of the proceedings for the registration of titles under the “Torrens system” and the amount in each case. This section (114) with its amendments read alone might be construed to include or cover all fees. It will be noted, however, that all these fees are for services actually rendered by the officers of the Court of Land Registration or by the register of deeds of the province, etc., while the fee under section 99 is not for services at all, but for the purpose of creating an “assurance fund.” The applicant admitted, by paying the fee for recording or registering his patent, that section 114 of Act No. 496, as amended, was applicable to a patent for public lands. An examination of section 114, as amended, shows that the only fee or fees collectible are fees for services actually rendered by employees of the Government. Section 6 of Act No. 1699 provides that all fees for the services of the clerk of the Court of Land Registration shall be deposited in the Insular Treasury, and all fees payable for the services of the register of deeds, etc., shall be deposited in the provincial treasury, or in the case of the register of the city of Manila, then they shall be deposited in the Insular Treasury. These funds are not available for the payment of any damages which may result to the real owner of property by reason of an illegal or improper registration under the “Torrens system” in the name of another, not the real owner. (See sees. 100, 101,102, and 103, Act No. 496.) The “assurance fund” is created for the purpose of paying any damages which may result from an improper or illegal registration. All the people of the Philippine Archipelago may be taxed for the purpose of paying these damages if the “assurance fund” is not sufficient, (Sec. 103, Act No. 496.) A large portion of the lands of the Archipelago still belong to the public domain. All original patents granted thereto are given the advantage and protection of the provisions of Act No. 496. Why should the future holders of these original patents be entitled to the protection of this law without sharing its burdens? We believe that when the legislative department of the Government provided that “Whenever public lands in the Philippine Islands, * * * are alienated, granted, or conveyed to persons or to public or to private corporations, the same shall be brought forthwith under the operation of this Act (No. 496) and shall become registered lands,” thereby giving the holder of these original patents the benefit of said Act (No. 496), it intended also to impose upon such grantees the burdens of said Act. But in reply to this consideration we are met with the question, Why should the Government require a fund to insure against its own acts, thereby implying that there is no possibility of mistakes occurring in the granting of these patents and that there is no possibility of the occurrence of damages? The, literally, hundreds of cases which have been brought in the courts of the United States to set aside original patents granted by the Government which have been secured by fraud, mistake, etc., are a complete answer to this contention. We are of the opinion and so hold that when the legislative department of the Government provided in section 99 of Act No. 496 that “Upon the original registration of land under this Act,” etc., “there shall be paid to the register of deeds one-tenth of one per cent of the assessed value of the real estate,” etc.; and when it provided that “Whenever public lands,” etc., “are alienated, granted, or conveyed,” etc., “the same shall be brought forthwith under the provisions of this Act” (sec. 122, Act No. 496), that it intended to bring all future titles granted to public lands immediately under the “Torrens system” and that such holders, in order to secure the registration of such titles, should make a contribution to the “assurance fund.” It not being the clear and specific legal duty, therefore, of the defendant to register the patent in question without requiring the payment of the fee provided for in section 99 of Act No. 496, the demurrer is hereby sustained with costs, and the petitioner is hereby given ten days from receipt of notice of this decision in which to amend his petition, if he so desires. If the petition is not amended within ten days, then let a judgment be entered with costs denying the issuance of the writ of mandamus prayed for in said petition. So ordered. Arellano, C. J., Torres and Mapa, JJ., concur.