Good faith and forced land title

In Sps. Solivel v. Judge Francisco, the High Court held that, in order that the holder of a certificate for value issued by virtue of the registration of a voluntary instrument may be considered a holder in good faith for value, the instrument registered should not be forged. When the instrument presented is forged, even if accompanied by the owner's duplicate certificate of title, the registered owner does not thereby lose his title, and neither does the assignee in the forged deed acquire any right or title to the property.

The innocent purchaser for value protected by law is one who purchases a titled land by virtue of a deed executed by the registered owner himself, not by a forged deed, as the law expressly states.

In Instrade, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, it was reiterated that: "[A]s early as Joaquin v. Madrid, x x x, [it was] said that in order that the holder of a certificate for value issued by virtue of the registration of a voluntary instrument may be considered a holder in good faith and for value, the instrument registered should not be forged." Indubitably, therefore, a deed of absolute sale does not convey any title. Consequently, none can take refuge in the protection accorded by the Torrens system on titled lands.

Thus, it has been consistently held that, with the presentation of the forged deed, even if accompanied by the owner's duplicate certificate of title, the registered owner did not thereby lose his title, and neither does the assignee in the forged deed acquire any right or title to the said property. (Spouses Bernales v. Heirs of Julian Sambaan, 624 Phil. 88, 104-105, 2010)