Torrens Title

Torrens title is a system of land registration, in which a register of land holdings maintained by the state guarantees an indefeasible title to those included in the register. Land ownership is transferred through registration of title instead of using deeds. Its main purpose is to simplify land transactions and to certify to the ownership of an absolute title to realty. It has become pervasive around the countries strongly influenced by Britain, especially those in the Commonwealth of Nations. It is named after Sir Robert Richard Torrens, GCMG (1814 – 31 August 1884), who was the third Premier of South Australia.

The Torrens title system operates on the principle of "title by registration" (granting the high indefeasibility of a registered ownership) rather than "registration of title." The system does away with the need for proving a chain of title (i.e. tracing title through a series of documents). The State guarantees title and is usually supported by a compensation scheme for those who lose their title due to private fraud or error in the State's operation.

In most jurisdictions, there will be parcels of land which are still unregistered.

The Torrens system works on three principles:

At common law, land owners needed to prove their ownership of a particular piece of land back to the earliest grant of land by the Crown to its first owner. The documents relating to transactions with the land were collectively known as the "title deeds" or the "chain of title". This event could have occurred hundreds of years prior and could have been intervened by dozens of changes in the land's ownership. A person's ownership over land could also be challenged, potentially causing great legal expense to land owners and hindering development.

Even an exhaustive title search of the chain of title would not give the purchaser complete security, largely because of the principle, nemo dat quod non habet ("no one gives what he does not have") and the ever-present possibility of undetected outstanding interests. For example, in the UK Court of Chancery case Pilcher v Rawlins (1872), the vendor conveyed the fee-simple estate to P1, but retained the title deeds and fraudulently purported to convey the fee-simple estate to P2. The latter could receive only the title retained by the vendor—in short, nothing. However, the case was ultimately decided in favor of P2, over P1. The courts of equity could not bring themselves to decide against a totally innocent (without notice) purchaser.

...
Wikipedia