In civil case No. 3998 of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, the herein  respondent,  Epifania Vasquez, on February  28, 1924, obtained a judgment against the herein petitioner, Amadeo Cavan, and one Mateo Filomeno jointly and  severally for  the sum of  P500,  with legal interest. On April 19,  1.924, a writ of execution  was issued under which a parcel of land, for which Amadeo Cavan and his wife  Maria Abella held Torrens certificate of title  No. 1417, was levied upon and sold by the sheriff to Epifania Vasquez, the  sale  being  entered  by memorandum on the certificate of title on May  29, 1924.  On March 28, 1925, the deputy sheriff, Anastasio Vidal, executed and delivered to Cavan the following document:

"(Caption  and title)

"By virtue  of the order of the court dated  March 24, 1925, amending the judgment by striking out in the findings of fact the words jointly and severally and the defendant Amadeo Cavan having, on the  25th of March, paid to the sheriff  the  sum of P272.06, which is the part he is bound to pay under the aforesaid amended judgment, I do hereby state that the said defendant is completely relieved therefrom.

"And the sheriff having sold at public auction a land of the said Amadeo Cavan whose description and  other  circumstances  are as follows:  Lot No.  one thousand four hundred eleven, original title No. one  thousand  four hundred seventeen, bounded on the  NE. and NW. by lot  No. 1410; on the SE. by Calle Gran; and on the SW. by calle, with a bamboo and nipa house thereon of 50 meters (sic), area, 1 are,  24 square meters.  Assessed value, P330.

"I,  Anastasio Vidal,  deputy sheriff  of the  Province of Cebu, by authority of the provincial sheriff, the  Honorable Arsenio  Climaco,  do hereby  declare dissolved the attachment levied upon the land above described as though said attachment had never been levied.

"In testimony whereof, I hereunto affix my signature in Cebu, this 28th of March,  1925.

"ARSENIO  CLIMACO
"Sheriff.
"By (Sgd.)  ANASTASIO VIDAL
"Deputy Sheriff. "

                                                                                   (Acknowledgment)"

On the strength of this document the register of deeds, on May 31, 1925, cancelled  the  memorandum of May  29, 1924.   On  June 29,  1925,  Epifania Vasquez  filed a  motion in the Court of First Instance in said civil case  No. 3998, asking that the certificate  of  title of Amadeo Cavan and his wife for the land in question  be cancelled and a new certificate  issued in favor of Epifania, on the ground that the time for redemption from the sheriff's sale had expired and that the sheriff had executed a final  deed of sale in  her favor on June  20,  1925.  No notice of  this motion  was given Amadeo  Cavan  and  his wife  and  no hearing was had,  but the court  nevertheless  on the same date issued  an  order in said  civil case No. 3998 directing the register of deeds to cancel the existing certificate of title and issue another in favor of the movant, in accordance with  her motion.

On July 8,  1925,  Amadeo Cavan, on being informed of the order of June 29, presented a motion to the court asking that the order be revoked on the ground that he had not been notified of the motion upon which it is based and that in any event the motion should have been  presented in the land registration case in  which the registration of the land was decreed.  On August 5, 1925, this motion was denied.  It further appears from the record that some attempt  was made on the part of Amadeo Cavan to appeal and that the bill of exceptions was filed, but that the court refused to certify the same.

The petition in the  present case was filed on September 11, 1925,  the  petitioner alleging most of the facts herein-before set forth and asking that a writ of certiorari issue and. that it be declared that the court below exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing the order of June 29, 1925, in civil cause  No. 3998, which  directed the register  of  deeds to cancel certificate of title No. 1417 and to issue a new certificate in favor of the respondent Epifania Vasquez.

The petition must be granted.  The land in question is registered  under Act No. 496 and the motion and order of June 29,  1925,  involved the cancellation  of  an existing certificate  of  title and the  issuance in its stead of a new certificate, on the ground  that the  period  of redemption from the  sheriff's  sale  had  expired.  Section  78  of  the Land Registration Act provides that "upon the expiration of the time, if any, allowed by  law for redemption after registered  land has been sold on any execution,  or taken or sold for the enforcement of any lien of any description, the person claiming under the execution or under  any deed or other instrument made in the course of proceedings to levy such execution or enforce any lien, may  petition the court for the entry of a new certificate to him, and the application may be  granted   *   *  *"

The last paragraph of section 112 of the same Act reads as follows:

"Any petition filed under this  section and all petitions and motions filed under  the  provisions of this Act after original registration shall be filed and entitled in the original case in which the decree of registration  was entered."

It will be observed that the motion of June 29  was not filed in "the original case in which the decree of registration was entered," but in an ordinary civil action and in view of the provisions  quoted, it is evident that the court exceeded its jurisdiction in granting the motion  under these circumstances.   Land registration proceedings are as separate and  distinct  from  ordinary civil actions as are the latter from criminal actions, and  it will  probably not be contended that our courts have jurisdiction in civil actions to convict persons of criminal offenses.

The rule that all petitions and motions filed under the provisions  of the  Land Registration  Act must be presented in the original registration case, was adopted  with  an  intelligent purpose in view; to  allow such petitions and motions to be filed and disposed of elsewhere would eventually lead to confusion and render  it difficult to  trace the origin of the entries in the registry.

In the case under consideration the court also erred in ordering the cancellation of  the petitioner's certificate of title without giving him an opportunity to be heard, but in view of  what has been said, it is unnecessary here to decide whether that error would  in  itself justify the issuance of a writ of certiorari.

The petition is  granted and the above  mentioned order of June 29,  1925,  as  well as the subsequent  proceedings thereunder, are hereby declared null and void, without prejudice to the right of the respondent Epifania Vasquez to file a motion in the original land registration case for the cancellation of the petitioner's certificate of title and the issuance of a  new certificate in her favor,  said motion to be disposed of upon notice to the opposing party and due hearing.   The  respondent Epifania Vasquez will pay the costs of this action.   So ordered.

Avancena,  C. J.,  Johnson, Street,  Malcolm,  Villamor, Johns,  Romualdez, and Villa-Real, JJ., concur.