prevented from presenting fully and fairly his side of the case. Sec. 32.

. Review of decree of registration; INTRINSIC FRAUD - Acts of a party in a Innocent purchaser for value litigation during the trial, such as the use of The decree of registration shall not be reopened or forged instruments or perjured testimony, revised by reason of absence, minority, or other which did not affect the presentation of the disability of any person adversely, affected thereby case, but did prevent a fair and just nor by any proceeding in any court for reversing determination of the case judgments, subject, however, to the right of any May a petition for review of a decree under Section 38 person, including the government and the branches of Act 496 (now Section 32 of PD 1529) be filed by an thereof, deprived of land or any estate or interest oppositor who has abandoned his opposition in a land therein by such adjudication or confirmation of title obtained by actual fraud, to file in the proper Court of registration case after a decision has been rendered and a decree of registration issued? First Instance a petition for reopening and review of NO. The person(s) contemplated under Section the decree of registration, but in no case shall such 38 of Act 496 (now Sec 32 of PD 1529), to be petition be entertained by the court where an entitled to a review of a decree of registration, innocent purchaser for value has acquired the land or are those who were fraudulently deprived of an interest therein, whose rights may be prejudiced. their opportunity to be heard in the original Whenever the phrase innocent purchaser for value registration case. or an equivalent phrase occurs in this Decree, it shall When Property is Transferred to an Innocent be deemed to include an innocent lessee, mortgagee, Purchaser for Value or other encumbrancer for value. INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE one who Upon the expiration of said period of one year, the decree of registration and the certificate of title issued acquired the property for a valuable consideration not knowing that the title of the vendor or grantor was shall become incontrovertible. Any person aggrieved by such decree of registration in any case may pursue defective or void [Rivera vs Moran (GR No. L-24568 March 2, 1926)]. It includes innocent lessee, his remedy by action for damages against the mortgagee or other encumbrancer for value. applicant or any other persons responsible for the Where the certificate of registration was valid and the fraud. land in question was properly brought under the Grounds for Review This remedy is available to an aggrieved party operation of the Torrens system, the concept of within ONE YEAR after the date of entry of the innocent purchaser for value properly comes into play. But where the land in question was never brought decree of registration Applicant must have a estate or interest in the under the operation of the Torrens system , the concept of innocent purchaser for value cannot come land into play. No innocent purchaser for value has acquired It is well-settled that where innocent third persons, an interest therein relying on the correctness of the certificate of title There must be an ACTUAL FRAUD or thus issued, acquire rights over the property, the EXTRINSIC FRAUD court cannot disregard such rights and order the ACTUAL FRAUD intentional omission of a fact cancellation of the certificate. [Davao Grains, Inc. vs required by law to be stated in the application or a Intermediate Appellate Court (G.R. No. 78209 March willful statement of a claim against the truth. 31, 1989)] Everyone dealing with titled property whould have to The purpose of the law in giving aggrieved parties, check on the validity or invalidity of the original deprived of land or any interest, through fraud in the registration, the opportunity to review the decree is to certificate of title would wreak havoc and impair public confidence on the Torrens system. [Santos vs Court of ensure fair and honest dealing in the registration of Appeals (G.R. No. 90380 September 13, 1990)] the land Extrinsic or Collateral Fraud Distinguished from Conclusiveness of the Decree of Registration A land registration proceeding is in rem, therefore, the Intrinsic Fraud registration is binding upon and conclusive against all EXTRINSIC FRAUD - Connotes any persons including the government and its branches fraudulent scheme executed by a prevailing [Sorongon et al. vs Makalintal et al. (45 OG 9 litigant outside the trial of a case against the September 1949)] defeated party, or his agents, attorneys or witnesses, whereby said defeated party is

REVIEW OF DECREE OF REGISTRATION

Is it necessary that the Order of General Default be first lifted before a Petition to Review the Decree of Registration may be entertained? NO. The law neither requires the lifting of the decree of general default issued in the case nor the attaching of any affidavit of merit to the petition for review. As long as there has been fraud in obtaining the decree of registration, by reason of which another person has been deprived of land or any interest therein and such person filed his petition for review within one year after the entry of the decree, then the decree may be opened Effect of the Expiration of the Period for Review Upon the expiration of the one-year period, the decree of registration and the certificate of title issued shall become incontrovertible. After one year from the date of the degree, the sole remedy of the landowner whose property has been wrongfully or erroneously registered in another's name is not to set aside the decree, but, to bring an ordinary action in the ordinary court of justice for reconveyance or, if the property has passed into the hands of an innocent purchaser for value, for damages. [Gonzales vs Intermediate Appellate Court (GR No. 69622, January 29, 1988)] Collateral Attack on the Decree and Title not allowed Attack must be direct and not by a collateral proceeding. The validity of the certificate of title in this regard can be threshed out only in an action expressly filed for the purpose. [Ybaez vs Intermediate Appellate Court (G.R. No. L-68291, March 6, 1991) Made through an action or proceeding the main object of which is to annul, set aside, or enjoin the enforcement of such judgment, if not yet carried into effect ; or, if the property has been disposed of, the aggrieved party may sue for recovery

Lands et al. vs Register of Deeds of Rizal et al. (G.R. No. L-4463, March 24, 1953) The term reconvey means to convey back to former place, or to transfer back to former owner, as an estate, and reconveyance being a transfer of realty back to the original or former grantor. (Lacorte vs. CA, 286 SCRA 24) Requisites for Reconveyance To warrant a reconveyance of the land, the following requisites must concur: (1) the action must be brought in the name of a person claiming ownership or dominical right over the land registered in the name of the defendant; (2) the registration of the land in the name of the defendant was procured through fraud or other illegal means; (3) the property has not yet passed to an innocent purchaser for value; and (4) the action is filed after the certificate of title had already become final and incontrovertible [New Regent Sources, Inc. v. Tanjuatco, (GR No. 168800, April 16, 2009)] Nature of Action for Reconveyance Action for reconveyance is an action in personam, judgment therein is binding only upon the parties properly impleaded and duly heard or given an opportunity to be heard. [ Ching vs Court of Appeals (G.R. No. L-59731, January 11, 1990)] When may an Action for Reconveyance be Filed Action based on fraud - four years (Article 1391, New Civil Code) Action based on implied trust - ten years (Article 1144, New Civil Code) Action based on a void contract imprescriptible (Article 1410, New Civil Code) A registered owner may be barred from recovering possession of the property by virtue of laches. The person who was deprived of his property by fraud, whether actual or constructive, and was not at fault, may file such personal action for reconveyance

Reconveyance of property

It is the sole remedy of the land owner whose property has been wrongfully or erroneously registered in another's name is, after one year from the date of the decree, not to set aside the decree, as was done in the instant case, but, respecting the decree as incontrovertible and no longer open to review, to bring an ordinary action in the ordinary court of justice for reconveyance or, if the property has passed into the hands of an innocent purchaser for value, for damages. [Director of