Lucion and
Castillo vs. The Presiding Judge, RTC 16, Naval, Biliran, et. al.
CA-G.R. S.P.
No. 139529
March 30,
2015
Ponente:
Librea-Leagogo, C.C., J.
Gist:
A land registration case is not a civil
action. Hence, Rule 47 of the Rules is not a proper remedy to annul the former.
Facts:
A Petition for Annulment of Final Judgment
under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court (with Prayer for Preliminary Mandatory
Injunction) seeking to annul the Decision of the RTC Branch 16, Naval, Biliran,
entitled “Application for Land Registration Under Act No. 496, as amended by PD
No. 1529, Roman Uy as applicant”, the dispositive portion of which reads:
“WHEREFORE,
the Register of Deeds of the Province of Biliran is hereby ordered to issue an
Original Certificate of Title in favor of the petitioner ROMAN UY over the two
(2) parcels of land designated as Lot 1-A and Lot 1-C Psu-083727-002214
(Amd)-D, both situated at Barangay Burabod, Kawayan, Biliran. SO ORDERED.”
Issue:
Whether Section 1, Rule 47 of the Rules of Court is
a proper remedy to annul the judgment in a land registration proceeding
Ruling:
The petition is dismissed.
Section 1, Rule 47 of the Rules of Court limits the
coverage of petitions for annulment of judgment or final orders and resolutions
of the RTC in civil actions, viz:
Section
1. Coverage. This Rule shall govern the annulment by the Court of Appeals of
judgments or final orders and resolutions in civil actions of the Regional
Trial Courts for which the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for
relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault
of the petitioner.
Clearly, the Decision sought to be annulled is a
land registration proceeding. It is not a judgment or final order and resolution
in a civil action of the RTC, as required under Section 1, Rule 47 of the Rules
of Court. Thus, the filing of the instant petition under Rule 47 is clearly a
wrong or improper remedy.
A civil action is different from a land
registration case, which is a special proceeding. A civil action is defined as
one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right,
or the prevention or redress of a wrong. On the other hand, a land registration
proceeding seeks to establish the ownership by a person over a parcel of land.
A plain reading of Section 1, Rule 47 suggests that
it is limited to the annulment of judgments, or final orders and resolutions of
the RTC in a civil action, and its restrictive application cannot be enlarged
to include within its coverage a land registration proceeding.
As an action to annul a final judgment is an
extraordinary remedy which is not to be granted indiscriminately, Rule 47
cannot be availed of by petitioners as a remedy to annul the assailed decision
in the land registration proceeding.
