"x x x.
In Lacbayan v. Samoy, Jr.41 (Lacbayan) which is an action for partition premised on the existence or non-existence of co-ownership between the parties, the Court categorically pronounced that a resolution on the issue of ownership does not subject the Torrens title issued over the disputed realties to a collateral attack. It must be borne in mind that what cannot be collaterally attacked is the certificate of title and not the title itself. As pronounced in Lacbayan:
There is no dispute that a Torrens certificate of title cannot be collaterally attacked, but that rule is not material to the case at bar. What cannot be collaterally attacked is the certificate of title and not the title itself. The certificate referred to is that document issued by the Register of Deeds known as the TCT. In contrast, the title referred to by law means ownership which is, more often than not, represented by that document. Petitioner apparently confuses title with the certificate of title. Title as a concept of ownership should not be confused with the certificate of title as evidence of such ownership although both are interchangeably used. 42 (Emphases supplied)
Thus, the RTC erroneously dismissed petitioner’s petition for
annulment of sale on the ground that it constituted a collateral attack since
she was actually assailing Rogelio and Orlando’s title to the subject lands
and not any Torrens certificate of title over the same.
x x x."
See -
HILARIA BAGAYAS,
Petitioner,
-versus-
ROGELIO BAGAYAS,
FELICIDAD BAGAYAS,
ROSALINA . BAGAYAS,
MICHAEL BAGAYAS, and
MARIEL BAGAYAS,
Respondents.
G.R. Nos. 187308 & 187517
Promulgated: SEP 1 8 2013
DECISION
PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:
