Section 109. Notice and replacement of lost duplicate certificate. - In case of loss or theft of an owner’s duplicate certificate of title, due notice under oath shall be sent by the owner or by someone in his behalf to the Register of Deeds of the province or city where the land lies as soon as the loss or theft is discovered. If a duplicate certificate is lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced by a person applying for the entry of a new certificate to him or for the registration of any instrument, a sworn statement of the fact of such loss or destruction may be filed by the registered owner or other person in interest and registered.

 Upon the petition of the registered owner or other person in interest, the court may, after notice and due hearing, direct the issuance of a new duplicate certificate, which shall contain a memorandum of the fact that it is issued in place of the lost duplicate certificate, but shall in all respects be entitled to like faith and credit as the original duplicate, and shall thereafter be regarded as such for all purposes of this decree. (PD 1529)


What law governs the issuance of new owner’s duplicate certificates of title in lieu of lost ones?

Section 109 of P.D. 1529 is the law applicable in petitions for issuance of new owner’s duplicate certificates of title which are lost or stolen or destroyed (but the original title is still with the Registry of Deeds).


Where should the petition be filed?

The petition should be filed with the Regional Trial Court of the province or city where the land lies.


Who should be notified?

The notice of the petition should be sent to all persons interested in the property as shown in the encumbrances annotated in the original certificate on file with the Registry of Deeds.


Is there a need to notify the Solicitor-General?

Nothing in the law requires that the Office of the Solicitor General be notified and heard in proceeding for the issuance of an owner’s duplicate certificate of title. In contrast, §23 of the same law, involving original registration proceedings, specifically mentions the Solicitor General as among those who must be notified of the petition.  Similarly, §36 provides that the petition for registration in cadastral proceedings must be filed by the Solicitor General, in behalf of the Director of Lands.(Republic vs CA, G.R. No. 128531, October 26, 1999)


Is ownership an issue in a petition for the issuance of a second owner’s duplicate certificate of title in replacement of a lost one?

No. The ownership of the property is not in issue.

In a petition for the issuance of a new owner’s duplicate copy of a certificate of title in lieu of one allegedly lost, the RTC, acting only as a land registration court, has no jurisdiction to pass upon the question of actual ownership of the land covered by the lost owner’s duplicate copy of the certificate of title. Possession of a lost owner’s duplicate copy of a certificate of title is not necessarily equivalent to ownership of the land covered by it. The certificate of title, by itself, does not vest ownership; it is merely an evidence of title over a particular property.

In both species of reconstitution under Section 109 of P.D. No. 1529 and R.A. No. 26, the nature of the action denotes a restoration of the instrument which is supposed to have been lost or destroyed in its original form and condition.  The purpose of the action is merely to have the same reproduced, after proper proceedings, in the same form they were when the loss or destruction occurred, and does not pass upon the ownership of the land covered by the lost or destroyed title. It bears stressing at this point that ownership should not be confused with a certificate of title.  Registering land under the Torrens System does not create or vest title because registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership.  A certificate of title is merely an evidence of ownership or title over the particular property described therein. Corollarily, any question involving the issue of ownership must be threshed out in a separate suit... The trial court will then conduct a full-blown trial wherein the parties will present their respective evidence on the issue of ownership of the subject properties to enable the court to resolve the said issue. (Macabalo-Bravo vs Macabalo, G.R. No. 144099, September 26, 2005)


What are the issues to be resolved in a petition for the issuance of a second owner’s duplicate certificate of title?

 The only issues to be resolved are:

  1. Whether or not the owner's original duplicate copy had indeed been lost; and
  2. Whether the petitioner seeking the issuance of a new owner's original duplicate title is the registered owner or other person interested. ((Macabalo-Bravo vs Macabalo, ibid.)


 What are the procedure for the replacement of a lost duplicate certificate?

  1. The registered owner or other person in interest shall send notice of the loss or destruction of the owner’s duplicate certificate of title to the RD of the province or city where the land lies as soon as the loss or destruction is discovered;
  2. The corresponding petition for the replacement of the loss or destroyed owner’s duplicate certificate shall then be filed in court and entitled in the original case in which the decree of registration was entered;
  3. The petition shall state under oath the facts and circumstances surrounding such loss or destruction;
  4. The court may set the petition for hearing, after due notice to the RD and other interested parties as shown in the memorandum of encumbrances noted in the Original Certificate of Title or Transfer Certificate of Title on file in the office of the Register of Deeds;
  5. After due notice and hearing, the court may direct the issuance of a new duplicate certificate which shall contain a memorandum of the fact that it is issued in place of the lost or destroyed certificate and shall in all respects be entitled to the same faith and credit as the original duplicate.


Does a court have jurisdiction to issue a new owner’s duplicate of a Torrens certificate of title if it is shown that the existing owner’s copy has not, in fact and in truth, been lost or destroyed?

If a certificate of title has not been lost but is in fact in the possession of another person, the reconstituted title is void and the court rendering the decision has not acquired jurisdiction.

Where the certificate of title sought to be replaced was not in fact lost or destroyed, there was no necessity for filing a petition for the issuance of a new owner’s duplicate certificate of title. Said court never acquired jurisdiction to order the issuance of new certificates. Hence, the newly issued duplicates are themselves null and void. (New Durawood Co, Inc. vs CA, G.R. No. 111732, February 20, 1996)


Section 109,  P.D. 1529 vs. R.A. 26

Section 109 of P.D. 1529 is the law applicable in petitions for issuance of new owner’s duplicate certificates of title which are lost or stolen or destroyed. On the other hand, R.A. 26 applies only in cases of reconstitution of lost or destroyed original certificates on file with the Register of Deeds. (New Durawood Co, Inc. vs CA, ibid.)