View full case

HEIRS OF CLEMENTE ERMAC v. ERMAC

FACTS:

This case involves a dispute over the ownership of various parcels of real property that formed part of Lot No. 666 in Mandaue City, Cebu. The property was originally owned by Claudio Ermac and, upon his death, was inherited and partitioned by his children Esteban, Pedro, and Balbina. Siblings Pedro and Balbina requested their brother Esteban to have their title over the property registered, but Esteban was unable to do so. The task of registration then fell to his son, Clemente Ermac. However, Clemente applied for registration of the title in his own name, omitting his father's brother and sister, as well as his cousins. Despite registering the lot in his name, Clemente did not disturb or claim ownership over the portions occupied by his uncle, aunt, and cousins. The respondents in this case, who are heirs of Vicente Ermac, claim ownership over the portions of Lot No. 666 that they now occupy by right of succession as direct descendants of the original owner, Claudio Ermac. They allege that their ownership and possession had been peaceful and undisturbed until the petitioners, heirs of Clemente Ermac, filed an action for ejectment against them.

ISSUES:

  1. The validity of the Writ of Preliminary Injunction dated February 5, 1996 issued by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 28, directing the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 2, to cease and desist from conducting further proceedings in Civil Case No. 2401.

  2. Whether or not O.C.T. No. RO-752 issued in the names of [Spouses] Clemente Ermac [and] Anunciacion Suyco is indefeasible and incontrovertible under the Torrens System.

  3. Whether or not the alleged tax declarations and tax receipts are sufficient to defeat the title over the property in the names of petitioner's predecessors-in-interest [Spouses] Clemente Ermac and Anunciacion Suyco.

  4. Whether or not laches has set in on the claims by the respondents on portions of Lot No. 666.

RULING:

  1. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Decision of the Regional Trial Court, which found that Lot No. 666 was originally owned by Claudio Ermac and inherited by his children. The CA held that the respondents were able to prove that they and their predecessors-in-interest had been in open, continuous, and undisturbed possession of the property in the concept of owners. The CA also ruled that the certificates of title held by the petitioners, which showed that only Clemente Ermac claimed ownership of the entire property, did not discredit the respondents' claim.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Ownership should not be confused with a certificate of title. Registering land under the Torrens System does not create or vest title, because registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership. A certificate of title is merely an evidence of ownership or title over the particular property described therein.