Wednesday, March 11, 2009 [ manilatimes.net ]
THE Office of the Ombudsman on Monday indicted before the Sandiganbayan the Register of Deeds of Butuan City for violating Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
In a nine-page resolution, Ombudsman Ma. Merceditas Navarro-Gutierrez ordered that acting Regional Register of Deeds Antonio Espinosa Jr. be charged before the anti-graft court.
The chief Ombudsman found probable cause against Espinosa for issuing a new Transfer Certificate of Title, which causes undue injury to an individual and giving unwarranted benefits to another.
In the facts of the case, it was stated that on February 15, 1996, Ortega bought three-hectare agricultural land located at Barrio Taguibo, Butuan City, from a certain Pedro Daquipil.
A day after, the Bureau of Internal Revenue issued a Certificate Authorizing Registration in Ortega’s favor who settled and paid all outstanding realty taxes from 1980 up to 2005.
Ortega went to the Register of Deeds to have the property transferred to his name but he was told that the Department of Agrarian Reform clearance was needed since the property is classified as an agricultural land.
The issuance of Agrarian Reform department clearance was delayed and he was only able to cause the annotation of his adverse claim on June 11, 2003.
On November 24, 2006, TCT RT 2001 was canceled by virtue of Resolution of Judge Godofredo Abul and a new one was issued with TCT RT 48181, however, Ortega’s entries did not appear in the new title. But instead the new title was named after Jesus Calo.
This forced Ortega to file a case against Espinosa, Sheriff George Viajar and Calo.
In the findings of the Office of the Ombudsman, through Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer I Aileen Lourdes Lizada, it opined that the case of graft against Espinosa must be filed in court.
The Ombudsman ruled that Espinosa couldn’t hide behind the resolution of Judge Abul in escaping liability because the law on Registration of Land Titles and Deeds, which he as Register of Deeds must know, is very clear on the matter.
“Espinosa’s failure to carry over complainant’s Adverse Claim and Notice of Lis Pendens is considered by this office as gross inexcusable negligence,” the ruling says.
In the meantime, the Ombudsman junked the charges of falsification against Espinosa “because he did not alter the title nor did he make an untruthful statement in the title. What respondent did was he failed to carry-over the adverse claim and Lis Pendens, which he should have performed.
The charges against Viajar and Calo were also dismissed due to lack of probable cause since there is no showing that they had any participation in the complained act. Viajar had nothing to do with the issuance of the new title.--Jomar canlas
_____________________________________________________________________________________
