ACTUAL NOTICE REQUIREMENT UNDER SECTION 13 IN

RELATION TO SECTION12 IS MANDATORY AND

JURISDICTIONAL

Within 30 days before the date of hearing, the RTC shall cause said notice
to be:

(a) Published twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette, at

petitioner’s expense;

(b) Posted on the main entrance of the provincial building and of the
municipal building of the municipality or city in which the property is
situated; and

(c) Sent by registered mail or otherwise, at petitioner’s expense, to every

person named in said notice.

The requirements prescribed by Section 12 and 13 of R.A. No. 26 are

mandatory and compliance with such requirements is jurisdictional.
Notice of hearing of the petition for reconstitution of title must be served
on the actual possessors of the property. Notice thereof by publication is
insufficient. In petitions for reconstitution of titles, actual owners and
possessors of the land involved must be duly served with actual and
personal notice of the petition. Compliance with the actual notice
requirement is necessary for the trial court to acquire jurisdiction over the
petition for reconstitution.

Respondent judge failed to observe the notice requirement prescribed in

Section 13 of R.A. no. 26. He decided a reconstitution of title case
without the required notice to the interested parties including
complainants (PERALTA v. OMELIO A.M. No. RTJ-11-2259, October 22,
2013)

SOURCES OR BASES FOR RECONSTITUTION

Section 2 of Republic Act No. 26 states that original certificates of title

(OCTs) shall be reconstituted from the following sources, in this order:
1. The owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title;

2. The co-owner’s, mortgagee’s, or lessee’s duplicate of the said

certificates;
3. Certified copy of such certificate, previously issued by the Register of
Deeds or by a legal custodian thereof;

4. Authenticated copy of the decree of registration or patent as the case

may be, which was the basis of the certificate of title;

5. Deed or mortgage, lease or encumbrance containing the description of

the property covered by said title, and on file with the Register of Deeds,
or an authenticated copy thereof indicating that its original had been
registered; and

6. Any other document which, in the judgment of the court, is sufficient

and proper basis for reconstitution.

Meanwhile transfer certificates of title (TCTs) shall be reconstituted from

the same sources, and in the same order, except that a deed of transfer or
other document containing description of the property covered by the
TCT and on file with the Registry of Deeds, or an authenticated copy
thereof indicating that its original had been registered and pursuant to
which the lost or destroyed certificate of title was issued, is sufficient
instead of the authenticated copy of the decree of registration or patent
required for the reconstitution of an original certificate of title.

REQUISITES

LRC Circular No. 35, dated 13 June 1983

1. Certificates of title lost or destroyed for any cause shall be judicially

reconstituted in accordance with the provisions of Republic Act No. 26,
and its implementing rules and regulations, Circulars, Memoranda and
Administrative Orders relative to judicial reconstitution of lost or
destroyed certificates of title insofar as not inconsistent with this circular.

2. All petitions for reconstitution shall be directly filed in duplicate with

the clerk of court of the Regional Trial Court of the province or city where
the property is situated serving copies thereof and its annexes to the
following:

a The Registrar of Deeds concerned

b. The Director of Lands
c. The Solicitor General
d. The corresponding Provincial or City Fiscal

3. Within five (5) days from receipt of the petition, the Clerk of Court shall
forward to this Administration a signed copy of the petition together with
the necessary requirements as prescribed in Sections 4 and 5 thereof;
provided, however, that if the certificate of title sought to be reconstituted
covers two or more lots originally decreed in two or more registration
cases, or that the petition covers two or more certificates of title issued
pursuant to different registration cases, additional copies of the petition
should be forwarded to this Administration for each additional case.

4. Where the reconstitution is to be made from the sources enumerated in

Sections 2 and 3 (a-e) of Republic Act No. 26 the signed duplicate copy of
the petition to be forwarded to this Administration must be accompanied
by the following:

(a) A copy of the document on file in the Registrar of Deeds or title on the
basis of which the reconstitution is to be made duly certified by the Clerk
of Court of the Regional Trial Court where the petition is filed that the
same is the true and faithful reproduction of the document or title
presented by the petitioner or owner;

(b) A signed copy of the certification of the Registrar of Deeds concerned

that the original of the duplicate title on file in the Registry was either lost
or destroyed indicating the name of the registered owner, if known from
the records on file in the said office.
5. In case the reconstitution is to be made exclusively from sources
enumerated in Sections 2(f) and 3(f) of Republic Act No. 26 in relation to
Section 12 thereof, the signed duplicate copy of the petition to be
forwarded to this Administration shall be accompanied by the
following:

(a) A duly prepared plan of said parcel of land in tracing cloth, with two
(2) print copies thereof, prepared by the government agency which issued
the certified technical description, or by a duly licensed Geodetic Engineer
who shall certify thereon that he prepared the same on the basis of a duly
certified technical description. Where the plan as submitted is certified by
the government agency which issued the same, it is sufficient that the
technical description be prepared by a duly licensed Geodetic Engineer
on the basis of said certified plan.

(b) The original, two (2) duplicate copies, and a photocopy of the original
of the technical description of the parcel of land covered by the certificate
of title, duly certified by the authorized officer of the Bureau of Lands or
the Land Registration Commission (now NALTDRA) who issued the
technical description.

(c) A signed copy of the certification of the Registrar of Deeds concerned

that the original of the certificate of title on file in the Registry was either
lost or destroyed, indicating the name of the registered owner, if known
from the other records on file in the said office.

6. The Notice shall state, among other things:

(a) the number of the lost or destroyed certificate of title, if known;
(b) the name of the registered owner;
(c) the location and area of the property;
(d) the names of the occupants or persons in possession of the property;
(e) the owners of the adjoining properties;
(f) all other interested parties; and
(g) the date on which all persons having any interest therein must appear
and file their claim or objection to the petition.

7. The Clerk of Court must comply strictly with the requirements of

publication, posting and mailing as required under Section 13 of Republic
Act No. 26.
Notices of hearings shall also be given to the Registrar of Deeds of the
place where the property is located, the Administrator of the NALTDRA
and the provincial or city fiscal of the province or city where the land is
located who shall appear for and protect the interests of the government
in court on the basis of the report and recommendations of the
Administrator of the NALTDRA and the Registrar of Deeds concerned
which are, required to be submitted to
the Court.

8. Upon receipt of the petition, the Records Section of this Administration

shall, after the same is recorded in a separate book used exclusively for
reconstitution cases, forward all the papers to the Clerks of Court Division
for processing. If the Chief, Clerks of Court Division, finds that the
requirements as called for by these guideline have not been complied with
or that the plan and technical description as submitted by the petitioner
are deficient or defective, the court shall be immediately informed thereof
so that action on the petition may be held in abeyance until after the
requirements shall have been complied with. Thereafter, the Chief Clerks
of Court Division, shall forward the entire records of the case, properly
foldered, to the Head Geodetic Engineer of the Division of Original
Registration for examination and verification.

10. After the processing and approval of the plan and technical
description and the verification and examination of the documents to be
used as the source of the reconstitution shall have been accomplished, the
Head Geodetic Engineer shall return the entire records of the case,
together with his written comments and/or findings, to the Chief, Clerks
of Court Division, for the preparation of the corresponding report.
11. All papers, together with the Report, shall be forwarded to the Chief,
Docket Division, this Administration, who shall transmit the same to the
proper Regional Trial Court, thru the Records Section.

12. The Registrar of Deeds, upon receipt of a copy of the petition and
notice of hearing, shall verify the status of the title whether valid and
subsisting at the time of its alleged loss; whether or not another title exists
in the said office covering the same property; and as to the existence of
transactions registered or pending registration which may be adversely
affected thereby. He shall submit his written findings to the Court on or
before the date of initial hearing of the petition.

13. The Court, after considering the report of the Administrator of the
NALTDRA and comments and findings of the Registrar of Deeds
concerned, as well as the documentary and parole evidence presented by
the petitioner, may take such action on the petition as it may deem proper.

14. The Clerk of Court shall furnish by registered mail the Administrator
of the NALTDRA, the Registrar of Deeds concerned, the Solicitor General,
and the Provincial or City Fiscal each with a copy of the order or
judgment.

15. No order or judgment ordering the reconstitution of a lost or

destroyed certificate of title shall become final until after fifteen days (see
B.P. 129) from receipt of a copy thereof by the Registrar of Deeds and by
the Administrator of the NALTDRA without an appeal having been filed
by any of such officials (Sec. 110, P.D. 1529).

16. Should an order or judgment granting reconstitution be issued by the

Court without awaiting the report and the recommendations of this
administration as well as the verification of the Registrar of Deeds
concerned, or while the examination, verification and preparation of the
report and recommendation are still pending in the said office due to the
failure of the Clerk of Court or the petitioner to comply with all the
necessary requirements as called for herein, and it appears that there is a
valid ground to oppose the reconstitution, a motion to set aside the
order/judgment shall be filed by the Administrator of the NALTDRA
and/or the Registrar of Deeds thru the Solicitor General or the provincial
or city fiscal concerned.

17. In no case shall the Registrar of Deeds comply with the order of the
Court to reconstitute a certificate of title without the petitioner presenting
the certificate of finality from the Clerk of Court concerned.

ILLEGAL ORDER OF RECONSTITUTION

An order of reconstitution is illegal and improper as having been issued

in excess of jurisdiction, when it is effected by the Court on the affidavit
made by the Clerk of Court as to the status of a case whose records are
destroyed, based on his recollection which can hardly be regarded as
reliable without intervention and opportunity of the parties to check upon
its correctness, and without any petition or expressed desire therefore by
the parties interested (Valenzuela vs. Aguilar, 47 Off. Gaz. p. 739, 1951).

An order for reconstitution of title is a nullity and the order for its
reconstitution does not become final if no such original title in fact exists.
The court rendering the order has not acquired jurisdiction. The order
may be attacked at any time.

Sec. 19. If the certificate of title considered lost or destroyed, and

subsequently found or recovered, is not in the name of the same person
in whose favor the reconstituted certificate of title has been issued, the
register of deeds should bring the matter to the attention of the proper
Court of First Instance, which, after due notice and hearing, shall order
the cancellation of the reconstituted certificate of title and render, with
respect to the memoranda of new liens or encumbrances, if any, made on
the reconstituted certificate of title, after its reconstitution, such judgment
as justice and equity may require; Provided, however, That if the
reconstituted certificate of title has been cancelled by virtue of any deed
or instrument, whether voluntary or involuntary or by an order of the
court and a new certificate of title has been issued, the procedure
prescribed above with respect to memoranda of new liens or
encumbrances made on the reconstituted certificate of title, after its
reconstitution, shall be followed with respect to the new certificate of title,
and to such new liens or encumbrances, if any, as may have been made
on the latter, after the issuance thereof.’’

A wrongly reconstituted certificate of title secured through fraud and

misrepresentation cannot be the source of legitimate rights and benefits
unless of course the transferee of the title is in good faith (Republic vs. Court
of Appeals, 1979, 94 SCRA 872-873; Jose vs. Court of Appeals, 1990, 192 SCRA
735, 741-742).

Neither can such a transferee of a reconstituted certificate of title secured

through fraud and misrepresentation claim prescription against the
registered owner and his hereditary successors (Bailon-Casilao vs. Court of
Appeals, 1985, 160 SCRA 738).

LAND REGISTRATION; IF THE TITLE WAS NOT LOST, THE

RECONSTITUTED ONE IS VOID

In Strait Times, Inc. vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 126673, August 28, 1998, it was
said that if a certificate of title has not been lost, but it is in fact in the
possession of another person, then the reconstituted title is void and the
court that rendered the decision had no jurisdiction (Serra vs. CA, 195
SCRA 482; Demetriou vs. CA, 238 SCRA 158; New Durawood Co., Inc. vs. CA,
253 SCRA 740).

It was further said that the reconstitution of a title is simply the reissuance
of a new duplicate certificate of title allegedly lost or destroyed in its
original form and condition (Rivera vs. CA, 244 SCRA 218). It does not pass
upon the ownership of the land covered by the lost or destroyed title.
Possession of a lost certificate is not necessarily equivalent to ownership
of the land covered by it. The certificate of title, by itself, does not vest
ownership, it is merely an evidence of title over a particular property
(Embrado vs. CA, 233 SCRA 335; Rep. vs. CA, 258 SCRA 712).
Loss or destruction of original or duplicate copies of titles to properties is common, with
reasons ranging from theft to a natural calamity.

For instance, as reported by the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s Raul J. Palabrica in his article
entitled, “Land Titles Swept by ‘Yolanda,’” the supertyphoon’s strong winds and storm surge
carted away, among others, the residents’ copies of the titles to their properties. Also, copies
that survived were either completely soaked, unreadable, or destroyed.

Meanwhile, a fire in 1998 razed original copies of the land titles in the custody of the
Register of Deeds of Quezon City.

“The loss resulted in an unprecedented land ownership mess,” said Palabrica. “Con artists
took advantage of the situation and duped countless land owners and buyers of real properties
with spurious documents.”

Said copies may be restored, however, through the process of reconstitution. In Republic v.
Holazo, the Supreme Court held that reconstitution, which is either judicial or administrative
in nature, denotes a restoration of the instrument which is supposed to have been lost or
destroyed in its original form or condition.

Its purpose is to have the title or any document reproduced, after observing the procedure
prescribed by law, in the same form they were when the loss or destruction occurred.

The filing of a petition initiates the proceedings for judicial reconstitution of a title.

Such a petition is mandated to prove that: (a) the title sought to be reconstituted has either
been lost or destroyed; and (b) at the time of said loss or destruction, the petitioner is the
registered owner of the property covered by the title.

The fact that neither a private person nor the Republic of the Philippines filed an opposition
to this petition will not relieve the petitioner of his burden of proof.

Section 2 of Republic Act No. 26 states that original certificates of title shall be reconstituted
from the following sources, in this order:

1. the owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title;

2. the co-owner’s, mortgagee’s, or lessee’s duplicate of the said certificates;

3. certified copy of such certificate, previously issued by the Register of Deeds or by a legal
custodian thereof;

4. authenticated copy of the decree of registration or patent as the case may be, which was the
basis of the certificate of title;

5. deed or mortgage, lease or encumbrance containing the description of the property covered
by said title, and on file with the Register of Deeds, or an authenticated copy thereof
indicating that its original had been registered; and
6. any other document which, in the judgment of the court, is sufficient and proper basis for
reconstitution.

Meanwhile transfer certificates of title (TCTs) shall be reconstituted from the same sources,
and in the same order, except that a deed of transfer or other document containing description
of the property covered by the TCT and on file with the Registry of Deeds, or an
authenticated copy thereof indicating that its original had been registered and pursuant to
which the lost or destroyed certificate of title was issued, is sufficient instead of the
authenticated copy of the decree of registration or patent required for the reconstitution of an
original certificate of title.

A petition for judicial reconstitution shall be filed in the proper Regional Trial Court by the
registered owner, his assigns, or any person having an interest in the property.

Said petition shall allege the following: (a) that the owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title
had been lost or destroyed; (b) that no co-owner’s, mortgagee’s or lessee’s duplicate had been
issued or, if any had been issued, the same had been lost or destroyed; (c) the location, area
and boundaries of the property; (d) the nature and description of the building or
improvements, if any, which do not belong to the owner of the land, and the names and
addresses of the owners of such buildings or improvements; (e) the names and addresses of
the occupants or persons in possession of the property, of the owners of the adjoining
properties and of all persons who may have interest in the property; (f) a detailed description
of the encumbrances, if any, affecting the property; and (g) a statement that no deeds or other
instruments affecting the property have been presented for registration, or if there be any, the
registration thereof has not been accomplished, as yet.

After the filing of a petition for judicial reconstitution of title, the Regional Trial Court (RTC)
shall issue a notice thereof, which shall state, among others: (a) the number of the lost or
destroyed certificate of title, if known; (b) the name of the registered owner; (c) the names of
the occupants or persons in possession of the property; (d) the owners of adjoining properties
and all other interested parties; (e) the location, area and boundaries of the property; and (f)
date on which all persons having interest therein must appear and file their claim or
objections to the petition.

Within 30 days before the date of hearing, the RTC shall cause said notice to be: (a)
published twice in successive issues of the Official Gazette, at petitioner’s expense; (b)
posted on the main entrance of the provincial building and of the municipal building of the
municipality or city in which the property is situated; and (c) sent by registered mail or
otherwise, at petitioner’s expense, to every person named in said notice.

In a long line of cases, the Supreme Court held that the requirements on the contents of said
petition and the publication, posting and sending by mail of the abovementioned notice, are
mandatory and jurisdictional. Failure to comply with these requirements will render the
judicial reconstitution proceedings void.

Moreover, trial courts should exercise extreme caution in granting petitions for reconstitution
of title because proceedings thereon may be misused as means of divesting individuals of the
titles to their property.
Meanwhile, Republic Act No. 6732 provides for the administrative reconstitution of lost or
destroyed certificate of title, which may only be availed of: (a) in case of substantial loss or
destruction of land titles due to fire, flood, or other force majeure as determined by the Land
Registration Authority (LRA) Administrator; (b) when the number of certificates of titles lost
or damaged should be at least 10 percent of the total number in the possession of the Office
of the Register of Deeds; and (c) when the number of titles lost or damaged is more than or
equal to 500.

Administrative reconstitution of title may be based on the: (a) owner’s duplicate of the
certificate of title; and (b) co-owner’s, mortgagee’s, or lessee’s duplicate of said certificate.

In its Circular No. 13 dated July 26, 1989, the LRA requires that the petition for
administrative reconstitution of title shall state, among others: (a) petitioner’s full name,
address and other personal circumstances; (b) the nature of his interest in the property; and
(c) the title number of the certificate of title sought to be reconstituted.

Said petition shall be accompanied with three clear and legible photocopies of the owner’s or
co-owner’s duplicate of the certificate of title and the registered owner’s affidavit, stating
that: (a) no deed or other instrument affecting the property had been presented for registration
or, if there be any, the nature thereof, the date of its presentation, as well as the names of the
parties, and whether the registration of such deed or instrument is still pending
accomplishment; (b) the owner’s duplicate certificate or co-owner’s duplicate is in due form
without any apparent intentional alterations or erasures; (c) the certificate of title is not the
subject of litigation or investigation, administrative or judicial, regarding its genuineness or
due execution or issuance; (d) the certificate of title was in full force and effect at the time it
was lost or destroyed; (e) the certificate of title is covered by a declaration regularly issued by
the Assessor’s Office; and (f) real estate taxes have been fully paid up to at least two years
prior to the filing of said petition.

If the petition were based on the co-owner’s or mortgagee’s duplicate of the certificate of
title, the petitioner shall state, in addition to the above-mentioned contents, that the owner’s
duplicate has been lost or destroyed and the circumstances under which it was lost or
destroyed.

Said petition may be filed with the Register of Deeds concerned by the registered owner, his
assigns, or other persons, both natural and juridical, having an interest in the property.
Thereafter, the Register of Deeds shall forward the petition and its accompanying documents,
together with its comments, if any, to the Reconstituting Officer, whose order of
reconstitution, however, may be reviewed, revised, reversed, or modified by the LRA upon
appeal.