Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC CONSUELO LEGARDA, with her husband MAURO PRIETO, plaintiffs-appellants,

vs. N.M. SALEEB , defendant-appellee. October 2, ! " #.R. No. $-%!&'

Singson, Ledesma and Lim for appellants. D.R. Williams for appellee. !O"NSON, J.# (ro) the record the follo*in+ facts appear, (irst. -hat the plaintiffs and the defendant occup., as o*ners, ad/oinin+ lots in the district of Er)ita in the cit. of Manila. 0econd. -hat there e1ists and has e1isted a nu)ber of .ears a stone *all bet*een the said lots. 0aid *all is located on the lot of the plaintiffs. -hird. -hat the plaintiffs, on the 2d da. of March, !2', presented a petition in the Court of $and Re+istration for the re+istration of their lot. After a consideration of said petition the court, on the 2"th da. of October, !2', decreed that the title of the plaintiffs should be re+istered and issued to the) the ori+inal certificate provided for under the -orrens s.ste). 0aid re+istration and certificate included the *all. (ourth. $ater the predecessor of the defendant presented a petition in the Court of $and Re+istration for the re+istration of the lot no* occupied b. hi). On the 2"th da. of March, ! 2, the court decreed the re+istration of said title and issued the ori+inal certificate provided for under the torrens s.ste). -he description of the lot +iven in the petition of the defendant also included said *all. (ifth. 0everal )onths later 3the &th da. of 4ece)ber, ! 25 the plaintiffs discovered that the *all *hich had been included in the certificate +ranted to the) had also been included in the certificate +ranted to the defendant. -he. i))ediatel. presented a petition in the Court of $and Re+istration for an ad/ust)ent and correction of the error co))itted b. includin+ said *all in the re+istered title of each of said parties. -he lo*er court ho*ever, *ithout notice to the defendant, denied said petition upon the theor. that, durin+ the pendenc. of the petition for the re+istration of the defendant6s land, the. failed to )a7e an. ob/ection to the re+istration of said lot, includin+ the *all, in the na)e of the defendant. 0i1th. -hat the land occupied b. t he *all is re+istered in the na)e of each of the o*ners of the ad/oinin+ lots. -he *all is not a /oint *all. 8nder these facts, *ho is the o*ner of the *all and the land occupied b. it9 -he decision of the lo*er court is based upon the theor. that the action for the re+istration of the lot of the defendant *as a /udicial proceedin+ and that the /ud+)ent or decree *as

bindin+ upon all parties *ho did not appear and oppose it. :n other *ords, b. reason of the fact that the plaintiffs had not opposed the re+istration of that part of the lot on *hich the *all *as situate the. had lost it, even thou+h it had been theretofore re+istered in their na)e. #rantin+ that theor. to be correct one, and +rantin+ even that the *all and the land occupied b. it, in fact, belon+ed to the defendant and his predecessors, then the sa)e theor. should be applied to the defendant hi)self. Appl.in+ that theor. to hi), he had alread. lost *hatever ri+ht he had therein, b. per)ittin+ the plaintiffs to have the sa)e re+istered in their na)e, )ore than si1 .ears before. ;avin+ thus lost hid ri+ht, )a. he be per)itted to re+ain it b. si)pl. includin+ it in a petition for re+istration9 -he plaintiffs havin+ secured the re+istration of their lot, includin+ the *all, *ere the. obli+ed to constantl. be on the alert and to *atch all the proceedin+s in the land court to see that so)e one else *as not havin+ all, or a portion of the sa)e, re+istered9 :f that <uestion is to be ans*ered in the affir)ative, then the *hole sche)e and purpose of the -orrens s.ste) of land re+istration )ust fail. -he real purpose of that s.ste) is to <uiet title to land= to put a stop forever to an. <uestion of the le+alit. of the title, e1cept clai)s *hich *ere noted at the ti)e of re+istration, in the certificate, or *hich )a. arise subse<uent thereto. -hat bein+ the purpose of the la*, it *ould see) that once a title is re+istered the o*ner )a. rest secure, *ithout the necessit. of *aitin+ in the portals of the court, or sittin+ in the >)irador de su casa,> to avoid the possibilit. of losin+ his land. Of course, it can not be denied that the proceedin+ for the re+istration of land under the -orrens s.ste) is /udicial 3Escueta vs. 4irector of $ands, ' Phil. Rep., ?%25. :t is clothed *ith all the for)s of an action and the result is final and bindin+ upon all the *orld. :t is an action in re). 3Escueta vs. 4irector of $ands 3supra5= #re. Alba vs. 4e la Cru@, A Phil. Rep., ?! Ro1as vs. Enri<ue@, 2! Phil. Rep., & = -.ler vs. Bud+es, A" Mass., " A)erican $and Co. vs. Ceiss, 2 ! 8.0., ?A.5 Dhile the proceedin+ is /udicial, it involves )ore in its conse<uences than does an ordinar. action. All the *orld are parties, includin+ the +overn)ent. After the re+istration is co)plete and final and there e1ists no fraud, there are no innocent third parties *ho )a. clai) an interest. -he ri+hts of all the *orld are foreclosed b. the decree of re+istration. -he +overn)ent itself assu)es the burden of +ivin+ notice to all parties. -o per)it persons *ho are parties in the re+istration proceedin+ 3and the. are all the *orld5 to a+ain liti+ate the sa)e <uestions, and to a+ain cast doubt upon the validit. of the re+istered title, *ould destro. the ver. purpose and intent of the la*. -he re+istration, under the torrens s.ste), does not +ive the o*ner an. better title than he had. :f he does not alread. have a perfect title, he can not have it re+istered. (ee si)ple titles onl. )a. be re+istered. -he certificate of re+istration accu)ulates in open docu)ent a precise and correct state)ent of the e1act status of the fee held b. its o*ner. -he certificate, in the absence of fraud, is the evidence of title and sho*s e1actl. the real interest of its o*ner. -he title once re+istered, *ith ver. fe* e1ceptions, should not thereafter be i)pu+ned, altered, chan+ed, )odified, enlar+ed, or di)inished, e1cept in so)e direct proceedin+ per)itted b. la*. Other*ise all securit. in re+istered titles *ould be lost. A re+istered title can not be altered, )odified, enlar+ed, or di)inished in a collateral proceedin+ and not even b. a direct proceedin+, after the lapse of the period prescribed b. la*. (or the difficult. involved in the present case the Act 3No. ?!'5 providin+ for the re+istration of titles under the torrens s.ste) affords us no re)ed.. -here is no provision in said Act +ivin+ the parties relief under conditions li7e the present. -here is nothin+ in the Act *hich indicates *ho should be the o*ner of land *hich has been re+istered in the na)e of t*o different persons. -he rule, *e thin7, is *ell settled that the decree orderin+ the re+istration of a particular parcel of land is a bar to future liti+ation over the sa)e bet*een the sa)e parties. :n vie* of the fact that all the *orld are parties, it )ust follo* that future liti+ation over the title is forever barred= there can be no persons *ho are not parties to the action. -his, *e thin7, is the rule, e1cept as to ri+hts *hich are noted in the certificate or *hich arise subse<uentl.,

and *ith certain other e1ceptions *hich need not be dis)issed at present. A title once re+istered can not be defeated, even b. an adverse, open, and notorious possession. Re+istered title under the -orrens s.ste) can not be defeated b. prescription 3section ?', Act No. ?!'5. -he title, once re+istered, is notice to the *orld. All persons )ust ta7e notice. No one can plead i+norance of the re+istration. -he <uestion, *ho is the o*ner of land re+istered in the na)e of t*o different persons, has been presented to the courts in other /urisdictions. :n so)e /urisdictions, *here the >torrens> s.ste) has been adopted, the difficult. has been settled b. e1press statutor. provision. :n others it has been settled b. the courts. ;o++, in his e1cellent discussion of the >Australian -orrens 0.ste),> at pa+e %2&, sa.s, >-he +eneral rule is that in the case of t*o certificates of title, purportin+ to include the sa)e land, the earlier in date prevails, *hether the land co)prised in the latter certificate be *holl., or onl. in part, co)prised in the earlier certificate. 3Oel7ers vs. Merr., 2 E.0.C.R., !&= Miller vs. 4av., A N.C.R., ""= $lo.d vs. M.field, A A.$.-. 3F.5 ?%= 0tevens vs. Dillia)s, 2 F.$. R., "2= Re+ister of -itles, vs. Esperance $and Co., D.A.R., %.5> ;o++ adds ho*ever that, >if it can be ver. clearl. ascertained b. the ordinar. rules of construction relatin+ to *ritten docu)ents, that the inclusion of the land in the certificate of title of prior date is a )ista7e, the )ista7e )a. be rectified b. holdin+ the latter of the t*o certificates of title to be conclusive.> 30ee ;o++ on the >Australian torrens 0.ste),> supra, and cases cited. 0ee also the e1cellent *or7 of Niblac7 in his >Anal.sis of the -orrens 0.ste),> pa+e !!.5 Niblac7, in discussin+ the +eneral <uestion, said, >Dhere t*o certificates purport to include the sa)e land the earlier in date prevails. ... :n successive re+istrations, *here )ore than one certificate is issued in respect of a particular estate or interest in land, the person clai)in+ under the prior certificates is entitled to the estate or interest= and that person is dee)ed to hold under the prior certificate *ho is the holder of, or *hose clai) is derived directl. or indirectl. fro) the person *ho *as the holder of the earliest certificate issued in respect thereof. Dhile the acts in this countr. do not e1pressl. cover the case of the issue of t*o certificates for the sa)e land, the. provide that a re+istered o*ner shall hold the title, and the effect of this undoubtedl. is that *here t*o certificates purport to include the sa)e re+istered land, the holder of the earlier one continues to hold the title> 3p. 2&A5. 0ection &% of Act No. ?!', provides that= >:t 3the decree of re+istration5 shall be conclusive upon and a+ainst all persons, includin+ the :nsular #overn)ent and all the branches thereof, *hether )entioned b. na)e in the application, notice, or citation, or included in the +eneral description >-o all *ho) it )a. concern.> 0uch decree shall not be opened b. reason of the absence, infanc., or other disabilit. of an. person affected thereb., nor b. an. proceedin+ in an. court for reversin+ /ud+)ents or decrees= sub/ect, ho*ever, to the ri+ht of an. person deprived of land or of an. estate or interest therein b. decree of re+istration obtained b. fraud to file in the Court of $and Re+istration a petition for revie* *ithin one .ear after entr. of the decree 3of re+istration5, provided no innocent purchaser for value has ac<uired an interest. :t *ill be noted, fro) said section, that the >decree of re+istration> shall not be opened, for an. reason, in an. court, e1cept for fraud, and not even for fraud, after the lapse of one .ear. :f then the decree of re+istration can not be opened for an. reason, e1cept for fraud, in a direct proceedin+ for that purpose, )a. such decree be opened or set aside in a collateral proceedin+ b. includin+ a portion of the land in a subse<uent certificate or decree of re+istration9 De do not believe the la* conte)plated that a person could be deprived of his re+istered title in that *a.. De have in this /urisdiction a +eneral statutor. provision *hich +overns the ri+ht of the o*nership of land *hen the sa)e is re+istered in the ordinar. re+istr. in the na)e of t*o persons. Article ?A& of the Civil Code provides, a)on+ other thin+s, that *hen one piece of

real propert. had been sold to t*o different persons it shall belon+ to the person ac<uirin+ it, *ho first inscribes it in the re+istr.. -his rule, of course, presupposes that each of the vendees or purchasers has ac<uired title to the land. -he real o*nership in such a case depends upon priorit. of re+istration. Dhile *e do not no* decide that the +eneral provisions of the Civil Code are applicable to the $and Re+istration Act, even thou+h *e see no ob/ection thereto, .et *e thin7, in the absence of other e1press provisions, the. should have a persuasive influence in adoptin+ a rule for +overnin+ the effect of a double re+istration under said Act. Adoptin+ the rule *hich *e believe to be )ore in consonance *ith the purposes and the real intent of the torrens s.ste), *e are of the opinion and so decree that in case land has been re+istered under the $and Re+istration Act in the na)e of t*o different persons, the earlier in date shall prevail. :n reachin+ the above conclusion, *e have not overloo7ed the forceful ar+u)ent of the appellee. ;e sa.s, a)on+ other thin+s= >Dhen Prieto et al. *ere served *ith notice of the application of -eus 3the predecessor of the defendant5 the. beca)e defendants in a proceedin+ *herein he, -eus, *as see7in+ to foreclose their ri+ht, and that of orders, to the parcel of land described in his application. -hrou+h their failure to appear and contest his ri+ht thereto, and the subse<uent entr. of a default /ud+)ent a+ainst the), the. beca)e irrevocabl. bound b. the decree ad/udicatin+ such land to -eus. -he. had their da. in court and can not set up their o*n o)ission as +round for i)pu+nin+ the validit. of a /ud+)ent dul. entered b. a court of co)petent /urisdiction. -o decide other*ise *ould be to hold that lands *ith torrens titles are above the la* and be.ond the /urisdiction of the courts>. As *as said above, the pri)ar. and funda)ental purpose of the torrens s.ste) is to <uiet title. :f the holder of a certificate cannot rest secure in this re+istered title then the purpose of the la* is defeated. :f those dealin+ *ith re+istered land cannot rel. upon the certificate, then nothin+ has been +ained b. the re+istration and the e1pense incurred thereb. has been in vain. :f the holder )a. lose a strip of his re+istered land b. the )ethod adopted in the present case, he )a. lose it all. 0uppose *ithin the si1 .ears *hich elapsed after the plaintiff had secured their title, the. had )ort+a+ed or sold their ri+ht, *hat *ould be the position or ri+ht of the )ort+a+ee or vendee9 -hat )ista7es are bound to occur cannot be denied, and so)eti)es the da)a+e done thereb. is irreparable. :t is the dut. of the courts to ad/ust the ri+hts of the parties under such circu)stances so as to )ini)i@e such da)a+es, ta7in+ into consideration all of the conditions and the dili+ence of the respective parties to avoid the). :n the present case, the appellee *as the first ne+li+ent 3+rantin+ that he *as the real o*ner, and if he *as not the real o*ner he can not co)plain5 in not opposin+ the re+istration in the na)e of the appellants. ;e *as a part.-defendant in an action for the re+istration of the lot in <uestion, in the na)e of the appellants, in !2'. >-hrou+h his failure to appear and to oppose such re+istration, and the subse<uent entr. of a default /ud+)ent a+ainst hi), he beca)e irrevocabl. bound b. the decree ad/udicatin+ such land to the appellants. ;e had his da. in court and should not be per)itted to set up his o*n o)issions as the +round for i)pu+nin+ the validit. of a /ud+)ent dul. entered b. a court of co)petent /urisdiction.> #rantin+ that he *as the o*ner of the land upon *hich the *all is located, his failure to oppose the re+istration of the sa)e in the na)e of the appellants, in the absence of fraud, forever closes his )outh a+ainst i)pu+nin+ the validit. of that /ud+)ent. -here is no )ore reason *h. the doctrine invo7ed b. the appellee should be applied to the appellants than to hi). De have decided, in case of double re+istration under the $and Re+istration Act, that the o*ner of the earliest certificate is the o*ner of the land. -hat is the rule bet*een ori+inal parties. Ma. this rule be applied to successive vendees of the o*ners of such certificates9 0uppose that one or the other of the parties, before the error is discovered, transfers his ori+inal certificate to an >innocent purchaser.> -he +eneral rule is that the vendee of land has no +reater ri+ht, title, or interest than his vendor= that he ac<uires the ri+ht *hich his

vendor had, onl.. 8nder that rule the vendee of the earlier certificate *ould be the o*ner as a+ainst the vendee of the o*ner of the later certificate. De find statutor. provisions *hich, upon first readin+, see) to cast so)e doubt upon the rule that the vendee ac<uires the interest of the vendor onl.. 0ections &%, "", and 2 of Act No. ?!' indicate that the vendee )a. ac<uire ri+hts and be protected a+ainst defenses *hich the vendor *ould not. 0aid sections spea7 of available ri+hts in favor of third parties *hich are cut off b. virtue of the sale of the land to an >innocent purchaser.> -hat is to sa., persons *ho had had a ri+ht or interest in land *ron+full. included in an ori+inal certificate *ould be unable to enforce such ri+hts a+ainst an >innocent purchaser,> b. virtue of the provisions of said sections. :n the present case -eus had his land, includin+ the *all, re+istered in his na)e. ;e subse<uentl. sold the sa)e to the appellee. :s the appellee an >innocent purchaser,> as that phrase is used in said sections9 Ma. those *ho have been deprived of their land b. reason of a )ista7e in the ori+inal certificate in favor of -eus be deprived of their ri+ht to the sa)e, b. virtue of the sale b. hi) to the appellee9 0uppose the appellants had sold their lot, includin+ the *all, to an >innocent purchaser,> *ould such purchaser be included in the phrase >innocent purchaser,> as the sa)e is used in said sections9 8nder these e1a)ples there *ould be t*o innocent purchasers of the sa)e land, is said sections are to be applied .Dhich of the t*o innocent purchasers, if the. are both to be re+arded as innocent purchasers, should be protected under the provisions of said sections9 -hese <uestions indicate the difficult. *ith *hich *e are )et in +ivin+ )eanin+ and effect to the phrase >innocent purchaser,> in said sections. Ma. the purchaser of land *hich has been included in a >second ori+inal certificate> ever be re+arded as an >innocent purchaser,> as a+ainst the ri+hts or interest of the o*ner of the first ori+inal certificate, his heirs, assi+ns, or vendee9 -he first ori+inal certificate is recorded in the public re+istr.. :t is never issued until it is recorded. -he record notice to all the *orld. All persons are char+ed *ith the 7no*led+e of *hat it contains. All persons dealin+ *ith the land so recorded, or an. portion of it, )ust be char+ed *ith notice of *hatever it contains. -he purchaser is char+ed *ith notice of ever. fact sho*n b. the record and is presu)ed to 7no* ever. fact *hich the record discloses .-his rule is so *ell established that it is scarcel. necessar. to cite authorities in its support 3North*estern National Ban7 vs. (ree)an, A 8.0., '22, '2!= 4elvin on Real Estate, sections A 2, A 2 GaH5. Dhen a conve.ance has been properl. recorded such record is constructive notice of its contents and all interests, le+al and e<uitable, included therein. 3#randin vs. Anderson, " Ohio 0tate, 2%', 2%!= Orvis vs. Ne*ell, A Conn., !A= Buchanan vs. :ntentional Ban7, A% :ll., "22= Ioun+s vs. Dilson, 2A N.I., &" = McCabe vs. #re., 22 Cal., "2!= Montefiore vs. Bro*ne, A ;ouse of $ords Cases, &? .5 8nder the rule of notice, it is presu)ed that the purchaser has e1a)ined ever. instru)ent of record affectin+ the title. 0uch presu)ption is irrebutable. ;e is char+ed *ith notice of ever. fact sho*n b. the record and is presu)ed to 7no* ever. fact *hich an e1a)ination of the record *ould have disclosed. -his presu)ption cannot be overco)e b. proof of innocence or +ood faith. Other*ise the ver. purpose and ob/ect of the la* re<uirin+ a record *ould be destro.ed. 0uch presu)ption cannot be defeated b. proof of *ant of 7no*led+e of *hat the record contains an. )ore than one )a. be per)itted to sho* that he *as i+norant of the provisions of the la*. -he rule that all persons )ust ta7e notice of the facts *hich the public record contains is a rule of la*. -he rule )ust be absolute. An. variation *ould lead to endless confusion and useless liti+ation. Dhile there is no statutor. provision in force here re<uirin+ that ori+inal deeds of conve.ance of real propert. be recorded, .et there is a rule re<uirin+ )ort+a+es to be recorded. 3Arts. %A" and '2' of the Civil Code.5 -he record of a )ort+a+e is indispensable

to its validit.. 3Art . %A".5 :n the face of that statute *ould the courts allo* a )ort+a+e to be valid *hich had not been recorded, upon the plea of i+norance of the statutor. provision, *hen third parties *ere interested9 Ma. a purchaser of land, subse<uent to the recorded )ort+a+e, plead i+norance of its e1istence, and b. reason of such i+norance have the land released fro) such lien9 Could a purchaser of land, after the recorded )ort+a+e, be relieved fro) the )ort+a+e lien b. the plea that he *as a bona fide purchaser9 Ma. there be a bona fide purchaser of said land, bona fide in the sense that he had no 7no*led+e of the e1istence of the )ort+a+e9 De believe the rule that all persons )ust ta7e notice of *hat the public record contains in /ust as obli+ator. upon all persons as the rule that all )en )ust 7no* the la*= that no one can plead i+norance of the la*. -he fact that all )en 7no* the la* is contrar. to the presu)ption. -he conduct of )en, at ti)es, sho*s clearl. that the. do not 7no* the la*. -he rule, ho*ever, is )andator. and obli+ator., not*ithstandin+. :t *ould be /ust as lo+ical to allo* the defense of i+norance of the e1istence and contents of a public record. :n vie*, therefore, of the fore+oin+ rules of la*, )a. the purchaser of land fro) the o*ner of the second ori+inal certificate be an >innocent purchaser,> *hen a part or all of such land had theretofore been re+istered in the na)e of another, not the vendor9 De are of the opinion that said sections &%, "", and 2 should not be applied to such purchasers. De do not believe that the phrase >innocent purchaser should be applied to such a purchaser. ;e cannot be re+arded as an >innocent purchaser> because of the facts contained in the record of the first ori+inal certificate. -he rule should not be applied to the purchaser of a parcel of land the vendor of *hich is not the o*ner of the ori+inal certificate, or his successors. ;e, in nonsense, can be an >innocent purchaser> of the portion of the land included in another earlier ori+inal certificate. -he rule of notice of *hat the record contains precludes the idea of innocence. B. reason of the prior re+istr. there cannot be an innocent purchaser of land included in a prior ori+inal certificate and in a na)e other than that of the vendor, or his successors. :n order to )ini)i@e the difficulties *e thin7 this is the safe rule to establish. De believe the phrase >innocent purchaser,> used in said sections, should be li)ited onl. to cases *here unre+istered land has been *ron+full. included in a certificate under the torrens s.ste). Dhen land is once brou+ht under the torrens s.ste), the record of the ori+inal certificate and all subse<uent transfers thereof is notice to all the *orld. -hat bein+ the rule, could -eus even re+arded as the holder in +ood fifth of that part of the land included in his certificate of the appellants9 De thin7 not. 0uppose, for e1a)ple, that -eus had never had his lot re+istered under the torrens s.ste). 0uppose he had sold his lot to the appellee and had included in his deed of transfer the ver. strip of land no* in <uestion. Could his vendee be re+arded as an >innocent purchaser> of said strip9 Dould his vendee be an >innocent purchaser> of said strip9 Certainl. not. -he record of the ori+inal certificate of the appellants precludes the possibilit.. ;as the appellee +ained an. ri+ht b. reason of the re+istration of the strip of land in the na)e of his vendor9 Appl.in+ the rule of notice resultin+ fro) the record of the title of the appellants, the <uestion )ust be ans*ered in the ne+ative. De are of the opinion that these rules are )ore in har)on. *ith the purpose of Act No. ?!' than the rule contended for b. the appellee. De believe that the purchaser fro) the o*ner of the later certificate, and his successors, should be re<uired to resort to his vendor for da)a+es, in case of a )ista7e li7e the present, rather than to )olest the holder of the first certificate *ho has been +uilt. of no ne+li+ence. -he holder of the first ori+inal certificate and his successors should be per)itted to rest secure in their title, a+ainst one *ho had ac<uired ri+hts in conflict there*ith and *ho had full and co)plete 7no*led+e of their ri+hts. -he purchaser of land included in the second ori+inal certificate, b. reason of the facts contained in the public record and the 7no*led+e *ith *hich he is char+ed and b. reason of his ne+li+ence, should suffer the loss, if an., resultin+ fro) such purchase, rather than he *ho has obtained the first certificate and *ho *as innocent of an. act of ne+li+ence.

-he fore+oin+ decision does not solve, nor pretend to solve, all the difficulties resultin+ fro) double re+istration under the torrens s.ste) and the subse<uent transfer of the land. Neither do *e no* atte)pt to decide the effect of the for)er re+istration in the ordinar. re+istr. upon the re+istration under the torrens s.ste). De are inclined to the vie*, *ithout decidin+ it, that the record under the torrens s.ste), supersede all other re+istries. :f that vie* is correct then it *ill be sufficient, in dealin+ *ith land re+istered and recorded alone. Once land is re+istered and recorded under the torrens s.ste), that record alone can be e1a)ined for the purpose of ascertainin+ the real status of the title to the land. :t *ould be seen to a /ust and e<uitable rule, *hen t*o persons have ac<uired e<ual ri+hts in the sa)e thin+, to hold that the one *ho ac<uired it first and *ho has co)plied *ith all the re<uire)ents of the la* should be protected. :n vie* of our conclusions, above stated, the /ud+)ent of the lo*er court should be and is hereb. revo7ed. -he record is hereb. returned to the court no* havin+ and e1ercisin+ the /urisdiction heretofore e1ercised b. the land court, *ith direction to )a7e such orders and decrees in the pre)ises as )a. correct the error heretofore )ade in includin+ the land in the second ori+inal certificate issued in favor of the predecessor of the appellee, as *ell as in all other duplicate certificates issued. Dithout an. findin+s as to costs, it is so ordered. Arellano, C.J., Torrens, and Araullo, JJ., concur. DIGEST Posted b. Pius Morados on Nove)ber 2A, 22 (Land Titles and Deeds urpose of t!e Torrens S"stem of Registration# $a%ts, A stone *all stands bet*een the ad/oinin+ lot of $e+arda and 0aleeb.. -he said *all and the strip of land *here it stands is re+istered in the -orrens s.ste) under the na)e of $e+arda in !2'. 0i1 .ears after the decree of re+istration is released in favor of $e+arda, 0aleeb. applied for re+istration of his lot under the -orrens s.ste) in ! 2, and the decree issued in favor of the latter included the stone *all and the strip of land *here it stands. Issue, Dho should be the o*ner of a land and its i)prove)ent *hich has been re+istered under the na)e of t*o persons9 "e&d, (or the issue involved, -he $and Re+istration Act 3Act ?!'5 affords no re)ed.. ;o*ever, it can be construed that *here t*o certificates purports to include the sa)e re+istered land, the holder of the earlier one continues to hold title and *ill prevail. -he real purpose of the -orrens s.ste) of re+istration, is to <uiet title to land= to put a stop forever to an. <uestion of the le+alit. of the title, e1cept clai)s *hich *ere noted at the ti)e of re+istration, in the certificate, or *hich )a. arise subse<uent thereto. -hat bein+ the purpose of the la*, once a title is re+istered the o*ner )a. rest secure, *ithout the necessit. of *aitin+ in the portals of the court, or sittin+ in the $mirador de su casa,% to avoid the possibilit. of losin+ his land. -he la* +uarantees the title of the re+istered o*ner once it has entered into the -orrens s.ste).