Director of Lands v. CA [Case Digest]

                                                                   Director of Lands v. CA

G.R. No. L-25723

Digested by G-one T. Paisones

 

 

Facts:

A land registration case involving 128 hectares of land located in Cabagan, Isabela. "Bruno Cabanatan "of Cabagan, Isabela. Applicants have not produced in evidence any composition title, the basis of their application. It was allegedly burned in the house of Pepe Buraga during the war.

Bruno died during the Spanish regime. The year when he died is not known. He is survived by seven children. Bruno had a brother named Leon, who had a son named Honofre (Onofre) who, obtained in 1921 a tax declaration for the 138 hectares at P5,200. In that tax declaration, it was stated that the land is located at Malasi, Cabagan, bounded on the north, east and south by public land and on the west by a mountain.

Judge Mariano Rosauro issued Decree for the registration of a parcel of land, plan 95520, with an area of 25 hectares located at the "sitio of Malisi, Barrio of Aggub," Cabagan. It was registered in the names of the following heirs of Bruno as proindiviso co-owners.

The provincial fiscal, in representation of the Director of Lands, alleged in his opposition that the land claimed by Bruno's heirs was covered by the approved and subsisting homestead applications of many owners. The instant second registration case was filed in 1937 based on an expanded survey. The applicants are the very same heirs of Bruno who were the applicants in the first registration case. Trial court and CA rendered decision in favor of Bruno's heirs.

 

Issue:

Whether or not the heirs of Bruno had a constructive possession over the subject land.

 

Held:

No.

 

Ratio:

SC hold that the rule on constructive possession does not apply to this case because the major portion of the disputed 128 hectares has been in the adverse possession of homesteaders and their heirs and is still part of the public domain until the patents are issued.

The area claimed is in excess of that mentioned in the committed position title. The alleged lost composition title cannot be given any probative value. Its contents were not proven by secondary evidence. The precise location of the land and the possession thereof were not proven by the applicants.