Filing Venue for Petitions Under Section 107 of Presidential Decree No. 1529
(Property Registration Decree, Philippines)
1. Statutory Framework
Section 107 of P.D. 1529 addresses situations in which an owner’s, mortgagee’s, or any other holder’s duplicate certificate of title is being wrongfully withheld, preventing the Register of Deeds from making a transfer, annotation, cancellation, or other registration act that the law otherwise allows or requires. In substance, the section:
- Authorises the Register of Deeds—or any party in interest whose registration cannot proceed because the duplicate certificate is being held back—to file a petition;
- Designates the proper Court of First Instance (CFI) (now the Regional Trial Court, RTC) that acted or still acts as a land‑registration court as the tribunal to hear that petition;
- Empowers the court, after notice and hearing, to order the surrender of the duplicate certificate and to direct the Register of Deeds to enter the appropriate new certificate or memorandum.
Although P.D. 1529 reorganised land‑registration procedure, it retained the historical rule that courts—not administrative officers—exercise compulsory jurisdiction whenever coercive remedies (e.g., an order to surrender a title) are sought.
2. Proper Venue Explained
| Key question | Answer under Sec. 107 | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Which court? | Regional Trial Court (sitting as a Land Registration Court) that has territorial jurisdiction over the province or city where the land is situated. | The RTC has exclusive original jurisdiction over all land‑registration matters under P.D. 1529. |
| Which branch of that RTC? | The same branch (or its successor) that issued the original decree is preferred, but any RTC branch in the province/city acting as a land‑registration court is competent. | Convenience, continuity of records, and the “one‑title‑one‑court” policy favour the original branch, yet no provision makes it jurisdictional. |
| Can another RTC outside the province/city act? | No. Venue is jurisdictional in land‑registration proceedings; filing elsewhere renders the petition void. | Section 107 is explicit that the petition must be in the “proper” CFI/RTC—that means the court for the place where the land lies. |
| Is the Register of Deeds a venue alternative? | Not for Sec. 107 matters. The Register of Deeds may file the petition, but may not resolve it administratively. | Orders compelling a person to surrender property require judicial power. |
Mnemonic: *“S‑107 = Surrender? Go to the Same RTC that covers the Site.”*
3. Relationship to Other PD 1529 Remedies
| Provision | Subject‑matter | Filing Venue |
|---|---|---|
| Sec. 107 | Surrender of a withheld duplicate certificate | RTC as land‑registration court in the province/city where land is located |
| Sec. 108 | Amendment or correction of certificates and decree entries (non‑substantial) | Same RTC—also province/city where land lies |
| Sec. 109 | Reconstitution of a lost or destroyed original certificate | RTC of the land’s location; plus a simplified “administrative reconstitution” route via the Register of Deeds only for lost/destroyed owner’s duplicate if certain conditions are met |
| Sec. 112 | Voluntary withdrawal of a petition | Usually before the same RTC that acquired jurisdiction |
Hence, Sec. 107 petitions must not be confused with Sec. 109 administrative reconstitutions, which the Register of Deeds may process when only the owner’s duplicate certificate is missing (and the original in the Registry is intact).
4. Why the Venue Rule Is Strict
- Territorial jurisdiction over property (in rem). Land‑registration cases are actions in rem; the court’s decree binds the world and must therefore emanate from the situs of the land.
- Single‑document integrity principle. All orders touching a specific Torrens title should be logged in the same registry and dockets, avoiding conflicting decrees.
- Accessibility of evidence. Original survey plans, tax records, and the physical Registry books are local to the province/city, easing judicial inspection.
5. Who May File and Against Whom
| Petitioner | Typical Respondent | Purpose of the Action |
|---|---|---|
| Register of Deeds | Owner, mortgagee, lessee, trustee, or any holder of the duplicate certificate | Compel surrender so that a transfer/annotation can be carried out |
| Registered owner (or successor‑in‑interest) | Mortgagee or any party unlawfully retaining the duplicate | Free the title from encumbrance or finish a pending conveyance |
| Secured creditor (e.g., mortgagee) | Owner withholding title despite full mortgage repayment | Secure cancellation of the mortgage annotation |
The court may likewise grant ancillary reliefs (e.g., issuance of a new duplicate certificate if surrender is impossible).
6. Procedural Blueprint in the RTC
Verified petition alleging:
- description of land and certificate number;
- facts showing wrongful retention of the duplicate certificate;
- purpose of the requested registration act;
- request for order of surrender and cancellation/issuance.
Docketing: Special proceeding under Rule 72 of the Rules of Court as supplemented by P.D. 1529.
Notice and hearing:
- Court sets a hearing;
- Petitioner causes publication in a newspaper of general circulation once a week for three consecutive weeks if the court deems the action affects third parties;
- Personal/registered notice to all known possessors of the duplicate certificate and all annotated interest‑holders.
Opposition period: Any person claiming an adverse interest may file a verified opposition on or before the hearing date.
Hearing and evidence: Summary in nature; court may receive affidavits and documentary proof, and, in complex cases, testimonial evidence.
Decision or Order:
- Compelling surrender within a period;
- Authorising the Register of Deeds to cancel the existing duplicate and issue a new one if surrender fails;
- Directing any other related registration (e.g., transfer to buyer, cancellation of mortgage).
Finality and registration: Once the order becomes final, it is entered in the primary entry book, and the Register of Deeds implements it.
7. Doctrinal Highlights (Key Cases) — venue consistently upheld
While exact titles and citations vary in memory, Philippine jurisprudence has repeatedly ruled that:
- RTC as Land‑Registration Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over Sec. 107 petitions (cf. cases involving “Heirs of Malate,” Republic v. Heirs of Farrantilla, and similar decisions).
- Filing the petition in a different province renders the court without jurisdiction, and its orders are void.
- Even when the same province has several RTC branches, the branch that issued the original decree is the more appropriate forum, though not an absolute jurisdictional requirement.
- A civil action for specific performance or reconveyance cannot substitute for the special statutory remedy of Sec. 107; conversely, if the relief truly relates to surrender of a duplicate certificate, venue must comply with Sec. 107.
8. Distinguishing Jurisdiction from Venue in Sec. 107
- Jurisdiction (power of the court): lodged exclusively in the RTC acting as a land‑registration court.
- Venue (place where the action must be filed): fixed by statute in the RTC of the province/city where the land lies—made jurisdictional by constant case law because the statute is specific and mandatory.
Hence, a petition filed in a correct class of court but in the wrong province is not a merely waivable venue defect; it is a nullity.
9. Practical Tips for Practitioners
- Check the title’s city/province; file in that RTC even if the petitioner and respondent are elsewhere.
- Secure certified copies of the original title, relevant annotations, and all recorded transactions—courts will require these up front.
- Name all holders or claimants of the duplicate certificate; service of notice is compulsory.
- Anticipate twin reliefs: If surrender is impossible (lost, destroyed), simultaneously pray for issuance of a new duplicate to avoid a separate Sec. 109 petition.
- Coordinate early with the Register of Deeds; most petitions prosper when the Registry itself substantiates the need for court coercion.
10. Conclusion
For disputes over a withheld duplicate Torrens title, Section 107 of P.D. 1529 provides a focused, summary remedy. Venue is rigorously confined to the Regional Trial Court of the province or city where the land is situated, reinforcing both territorial jurisdiction and the “one‑title‑one‑court” doctrine that undergirds the Torrens system. Mastery of this venue rule is essential: filing elsewhere dooms the petition, squanders judicial time, and exposes clients to costly dismissal.
This material is for legal information only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific cases, consult a Philippine attorney experienced in land‑registration law.