
    Escalona v. The Registrar of Property.
    Appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Property of San Juan.
    No. 9.
    Decided November 15, 1904.
    Cancellation — Cautionary Notice — Mortgage.—Cautionary notice of a mortgage having been entered in the registry of property, the same should not be cancelled unless directed by a final judgment, or by the express consent of the persons in whose favor the cautionary notice appears to have been made, or of their legal representatives.
    
      STATEMENT OE THE CASE.
    A hearing was had of the present appeal, taken at the request of Francisco Escalona, from a decision of the registrar of property of this city, refusing to cancel a mortgage.
    Vincent Dordal having by public deed of July 4, 1862, executed an acquittance for a mortgage credit amounting to 785.70 pesos current money which was due him by Mateo O’Farrill, upon presentation of said document in July last, to the registrar of property of this city for the purpose of can-celling the mortgage, said cancellation was refused by the registrar for the reasons stated in the memorandum decision appended at the end of the above-mentioned document, which reads as follows:
    “The cancellation as requested of the mortgage constituted upon house No. 57 Luna street, this city, to which the foregoing document refers, is refused, because it appears from the registry that a cautionary notice of aforesaid mortgage right was entered on the 20th instant for the period of one hundred and twenty days, in favor of (Jabino Alvaro Dordal, Felix León and Benito B. Dordal, agreeably to the reconveyance and transfer made to them by Tulio C. Otero y Cuyar; for which reason said cancellation should not be made, and cautionary notice thereof has been entered on the reverse side of folio 179, of volume 54, this city, estate No. 670, triplicate, entry letter C, to have legal effect during one hundred and twenty days from this date, and wherein the curable defect is noted that the mortgaged estate is not described in the foregoing document. — San Juan, Porto Rico, July 29, 1904.”
    Notice of said decision was given to the person presenting the instrument in question, who, not being satisfied with the registrar’s decision, requested that aforesaid document be referred to this Supreme Court for proper action, which was done by the registrar in a courteous letter of transmittal.
   Chiee Justice Quiñones,

after making the foregoing statement of facts, delivered the opinion of the court.

Cautionary notice of the mortgage in question having been entered in favor of Gabino and Benito Dordal and Felix León, by virtue of the reconveyance and transfer made to them by Tulio C. Otero y Cuyar, according to the registrar’s statement in his memorandum decision, the mortgage cannot be cancelled, except by a final decree or by the express consent of the persons in whose favor the cautionary notice appears to have been made, or of their legal representatives, according to article 82 of the Mortgage Law in force in this Island.

The adverse decision of the registrar of property of this city is affirmed, and the document presented is ordered to be returned to him, together with a copy of this decision, that proper effect may be given thereto.

Justices Hernandez, Figueras, MacLeary and Wolf concurred.  