Even easier is just signing the document using any other digital signature scheme, such as one operated directly by the title office. Blockchains do not benefit this scenario at all, in fact they just make it worse by making it more convoluted.
So why do we need blockchain in the first place? Just upload a digitally-signed file to a conventional file repository. In the end, you're trusting a third party, centralized peer, not the chain, to hold the de facto truth.
> And yet, forging your sheets of paper or invalid transfer signatures on the real sheet of paper (how classic titles and deeds work, as in when I signed over ownership of a car once) is way easier than forging this blockchain record
You don't need blockchain to have a better replacement than paper. Digital signatures in a centralized repository can do it faster, cheaper and with reversibility as a feature.
Unless the token is being used to control some kind of elaborate--and likely magical--boobytrap (to enforce that the owner of the token is the only person who can even step foot on the property), the government would just say that old token was no longer authoritative and that some new token is... which is no different from how a standard title or deed also can't be blindly trusted (as it may have been revoked by the government). And yet, forging your sheets of paper or invalid transfer signatures on the real sheet of paper (how classic titles and deeds work, as in when I signed over ownership of a car once) is way easier than forging this blockchain record, and so this actually still provides a ton of benefit by avoiding cases that might have to go to court in the first place.