Case ID: pr_26/html/0682-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Wolf", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Chiqués, Appellant, v. Registrar of Caguas, Respondent.
    Appeal from a Decision of the Registrar of Property Refusing to Record a Mortgage Deed.
    No. 391.
    Decided November 25, 1918.
    Becokd op Title — Identity of Property — Difference in Acreage. — A slight difference between the acreage of property appearing in the records thereof in the registry of property and as stated in the documents presented for record is not sufficient to warrant a holding that the property is not identified, especially when no difference appears in the boundaries. The registrar should note the difference in the registry in the manner provided for by the regulations.
    The facts are stated in the opinion.
    
      Mr. Andrés Mena Latorre for the appellant.
    The respondent did not appear.
   Mr. Justice Wolf

'delivered the opinion of the court.

The sole matter involved in this appeal is that the deed presented for record describes a greater number of acres than was recorded before. Appellant points: out first that the excess is less than one-fifth of the total amount recorded previously and that such a small excess is permitted by virtue of the Decisions rendered by the G-eneral Directorate of Registries of Spain of Nov. 9, 1877; July 8, 1878; Sept. 7, 1880, and March 8, 1898, Odriozola’s: Diccionario de Jurisprudencia Hipotecaria, pages 774, 776 and 777, and the decision of this court in Cobb v. Registrar of Caguas, 12 P. R. R. 211.

Likewise, that the property is presented for record with exactly the same boundaries as it has always contained and hence that a possible misdescription of the acreage makes no difference.

We agree with the appellant and the note of the registrar must be

Reversed.

CMef Justice Hernández and Justices del Toro, Aldrey and Hutchison concurred.