The Supreme Court ruled that only the court overseeing the main action related to a property dispute has the authority to cancel a notice of lis pendens, which alerts potential buyers to ongoing litigation. This decision clarifies that a separate Regional Trial Court lacks jurisdiction over such cancellations, ensuring consistency and preventing conflicting rulings regarding property rights.

Navigating Property Disputes: Can a Separate Court Cancel a Lis Pendens?

The case of J. Casim Construction Supplies, Inc. vs. Registrar of Deeds of Las Piñas revolves around a petition to cancel a notice of lis pendens annotated on a property title. J. Casim Construction Supplies, Inc. filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Las Piñas City, seeking to cancel the notice of lis pendens, arguing inconsistencies in the inscriber’s signature and non-chronological entry dates. The Intestate Estate of Bruneo F. Casim, as intervenor, countered that only the court overseeing the main action, in this case, the RTC of Makati City, had jurisdiction to order the cancellation. This disagreement highlights a fundamental question: which court has the power to cancel a notice of lis pendens, and under what circumstances?

The heart of the matter lies in understanding the concept of lis pendens itself. Lis pendens, meaning “pending suit,” signifies the court’s control over property involved in a lawsuit until final judgment. This mechanism serves a crucial purpose: to notify the public that the property is subject to ongoing litigation, ensuring that any new owner is aware of potential claims. The Supreme Court emphasizes the protective nature of lis pendens:

Lis pendens î º which literally means pending suit î º refers to the jurisdiction, power or control which a court acquires over the property involved in a suit, pending the continuance of the action, and until final judgment. Founded upon public policy and necessity, lis pendens is intended to keep the properties in litigation within the power of the court until the litigation is terminated, and to prevent the defeat of the judgment or decree by subsequent alienation.

The Court’s decision hinged on the principle that the power to cancel a notice of lis pendens is inherent in the court overseeing the main action. This ensures that the court with the most intimate knowledge of the case and the property in question maintains control over the notice, preventing potential abuse or premature cancellation. The Supreme Court articulated this principle clearly:

A necessary incident of registering a notice of lis pendens is that the property covered thereby is effectively placed, until the litigation attains finality, under the power and control of the court having jurisdiction over the case to which the notice relates. In this sense, parties dealing with the given property are charged with the knowledge of the existence of the action and are deemed to take the property subject to the outcome of the litigation. It is also in this sense that the power possessed by a trial court to cancel the notice of lis pendens is said to be inherent as the same is merely ancillary to the main action.

The Court referenced several precedents to solidify this stance. Citing Vda. de Kilayko v. Judge Tengco, Heirs of Maria Marasigan v. Intermediate Appellate Court and Tanchoco v. Aquino, it underscored that the power to cancel a lis pendens rests with the court handling the primary case. This reinforces the idea that the cancellation is an ancillary matter directly tied to the resolution of the main dispute. The Supreme Court, quoting Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. v. Enriquez, further emphasized:

The cancellation of such a precautionary notice is therefore also a mere incident in the action, and may be ordered by the Court having jurisdiction of it at any given time.

However, the Court also clarified that once the main action has reached final judgment, the lis pendens becomes functus officio, meaning it no longer serves its original purpose. In such cases, while judicial cancellation might not be the appropriate route, administrative remedies are available. Section 77 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 outlines the procedure for canceling a lis pendens after final judgment through the Register of Deeds.

The Court explained this administrative option stating:

At any time after final judgment in favor of the defendant, or other disposition of the action such as to terminate finally all rights of the plaintiff in and to the land and/or buildings involved, in any case in which a memorandum or notice of lis pendens has been registered as provided in the preceding section, the notice of lis pendens shall be deemed cancelled upon the registration of a certificate of the clerk of court in which the action or proceeding was pending stating the manner of disposal thereof.

The petitioner’s allegations of forgery and its claim to be an innocent purchaser for value were deemed matters requiring factual determination, thus falling outside the scope of the current petition. The Court declined to rule on these issues, emphasizing that such questions necessitate a different legal avenue for resolution. This underlines the importance of pursuing the correct legal channels when addressing complex factual disputes related to property titles.

FAQs

What is a notice of lis pendens?	A notice of lis pendens is a formal notification that a lawsuit is pending involving the property, alerting potential buyers that the property’s title is subject to ongoing litigation.
Which court has the authority to cancel a notice of lis pendens?	Generally, the court overseeing the main action involving the property has the jurisdiction to cancel the notice of lis pendens, as it is considered an incident to the main action.
What happens to a notice of lis pendens after the main action reaches final judgment?	Once the main action reaches final judgment, the notice of lis pendens becomes functus officio, meaning it no longer serves its original purpose, and can be removed through an administrative process.
Can a party file a separate action to cancel a notice of lis pendens in a different court?	No, a separate action to cancel a notice of lis pendens cannot typically be filed in a different court; it must be addressed within the context of the main action.
What administrative remedy is available for canceling a lis pendens after final judgment?	Section 77 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 provides for the cancellation of a lis pendens after final judgment by registering a certificate from the clerk of court with the Register of Deeds.
What should I do if I discover a notice of lis pendens on a property I am interested in buying?	You should carefully investigate the underlying litigation to understand the potential claims and risks associated with purchasing the property, as you will be subject to the outcome of the litigation.
What does it mean when a notice of lis pendens becomes functus officio?	Functus officio means “having performed his office”. Once the decision has been made by the court, and there is a certificate of finality then it becomes functus officio.
What issues were not resolved in this case?	The court did not resolve the issues of forgery in the inscriptions and the status of petitioner as an innocent purchaser for value because they require factual determination and were not within the scope of the original petition.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s decision in J. Casim Construction Supplies, Inc. vs. Registrar of Deeds of Las Piñas reinforces the principle that the power to cancel a notice of lis pendens lies with the court overseeing the main action, while also providing guidance on administrative remedies available after final judgment. This clarification ensures consistency and predictability in property disputes, protecting the rights of all parties involved.

For inquiries regarding the application of this ruling to specific circumstances, please contact ASG Law through contact or via email at frontdesk@asglawpartners.com.

Disclaimer: This analysis is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal guidance tailored to your situation, please consult with a qualified attorney.
Source: J. CASIM CONSTRUCTION SUPPLIES, INC. VS. REGISTRAR OF DEEDS OF LAS PIÑAS, G.R. No. 168655, July 02, 2010