 Quieting of Title

- Art. 476. Whenever there is a cloud on title to real property or any interest therein, by reason of
any instrument, record, claim, encumbrance or proceeding which is apparently valid or effective
but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable, or unenforceable, and may be prejudicial
to said title, an action may be brought to remove such cloud or to quiet the title.
An action may also be brought to prevent a cloud from being cast upon title to real property or
any interest therein.

Art. 477. The plaintiff must have legal or equitable title to, or
interest in the real property which is the subject matter of the action. He need not be
in possession of said property.

For an action to quiet title to prosper, two (2) indispensable requisites must concur, namely: (1)
the plaintiff or complainant has a legal or an equitable title to or interest in the real property
subject of action, and (2) the deed, claim, encumbrance or proceeding claimed to be casting
cloud on his title must be shown to be in fact invalid or inoperative despite its prima facie
appearance of validity or legal efficacy.

Heirs of Jose Olviga v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 104813, October 21, 1993, 227 SCRA 330):
When the plaintiff in such action is not in possession of the subject property, the action
prescribes in ten years from the date of registration of the deed or the date of the issuance of the
certificate of title over the property. When the plaintiff is in possession of the subject
property, the action, being in effect that of quieting of title to the property, does not prescribe.

Heirs of Simplicio Santiago v. Heirs of Mariano E. Santiago: The one-year

prescriptive period, however, does not apply when the person seeking annulment of title or
reconveyance is in possession of the lot. This is because the action partakes of a suit to quiet
title which is imprescriptible. In David v. Malay, we held that a person in actual possession
of a piece of land under claim of ownership may wait until his possession is disturbed or his
title is attacked before taking steps to vindicate his right, and his undisturbed possession
gives him the continuing right to seek the aid of a court of equity to ascertain and determine the
nature of the adverse claim of a third party and its effect on his title.
in Republic v. Heirs of Felipe Alejaga, Sr. 441 Phil 656 (2002)

True, once a patent is registered and the corresponding certificate of title

[is] issued, the land covered by them ceases to be part of the public domain
and becomes private property. Further, the Torrens Title issued pursuant
to the patent becomes indefeasible a year after the issuance of the
latter. However, this indefeasibility of a title does not attach to titles
secured by fraud and misrepresentation. Well-settled is the doctrine that
the registration of a patent under the Torrens System does not by itself
vest title; it merely confirms the registrants already existing one. Verily,
registration under the Torrens System is not a mode of acquiring
ownership.