GR L 5623; (January, 1954) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-5623; January 28, 1954
MANILA TRADING & SUPPLY CO., petitioner-appellant, vs. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MANILA, respondent-appellee.
FACTS
The Manila Trading and Supply Co. is the lessee of three parcels of land in Manila owned by the Philippine Government, with the lease recorded on the Government’s Torrens Title No. 4938. The company erected new buildings on the leased lots after previous structures were destroyed during the war. On April 2, 1951, the company petitioned the Manila Court of First Instance to have the Register of Deeds annotate its declaration of ownership of these improvements on the certificate of title. The court granted the request. The Register of Deeds then demanded payment of P1,308 for the assurance fund under Section 99 of Act No. 496 (The Land Registration Act). The company refused to pay and sought relief from the court through a petition-consultation. The court upheld the Register of Deeds, prompting this appeal.
ISSUE
Whether the owner of buildings erected on leased land is required to contribute to the assurance fund when petitioning for annotation of ownership of those buildings on the corresponding Torrens certificate of title.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the appealed order, holding that the assurance fund contribution under Section 99 of Act No. 496 is required. The Court ruled that the term “land” as used in Section 99 includes buildings. The statute itself, in its initial sections, permits the registration of title “to land or buildings or an interest therein” and declares proceedings to be in rem against the land and the buildings and improvements thereon. The Court interpreted that the statute subsequently used the word “land” as a short term equivalent to “land or buildings and improvements” to avoid repetition. Furthermore, buildings constitute “real estate,” a term used synonymously with “land” in Section 99. It would be unfair for the petitioner to enjoy the protection of the assurance fund and the Land Registration System while refusing to contribute to its maintenance. Therefore, the annotation of ownership of the buildings on the title falls within the purview of Section 99, requiring the payment to the assurance fund.