Respondents Spouses Go applied
for the registration and confirmation of title over a parcel of land covering
an area of 1,000 square meters. It was registered under their names
for taxation purposes. They had paid the real property taxes, including the
arrears. They claimed to be in an open, continuous, exclusive, notorious, and
actual possession of the property for seven (7) years since they bought it. They
also tacked their possession through that of their predecessors-in-interest, as
follows:
Sometime in 1945, Anselmo came to know that his parents, Sergia and Andres de
Torres, owned Lot No. 4699, a bigger property where Lot No. 4699-B came from.
According to Anselmo, the Spouses de Torres paid the real property taxes during
their lifetime and planted bananas, mangoes, calamansi, and rice on this lot.
In the 1960, Anselmo and his siblings inherited Lot No. 4699 from their parents
upon their deaths.
On 2000, the Spouses Go bought
Lot No. 4699-B from the previous owners evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale.
Spouses Go, on their application for
registration and confirmation of title, attached the Report of Special Land
Investigator and the Certification from CENRO and DENR. The Report and Certification
stated that the property was located in an alienable and disposable zone. And no
patent or decree was previously issued over the property.
Republic of the Philippines (petitioner) opposed respondents' application for
registration for the following reasons: 1) Lot No. 4699-B was part of the
public domain; 2) neither the Spouses Go nor their predecessors-in-interest had
been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of
the property; 3) the tax declaration and payment were not competent or
sufficient proof of ownership, especially considering that these were
relatively recent.
Q: If you were the judge, how will you decide on this case?
A: If I were the judge, I would
deny the application for registration and confirmation of title for lack of
merit.
The 1987 Constitution declares
that the State owns all public lands. Public lands are classified
into agricultural, mineral, timber or forest, and national parks. Of these four
(4) types of public lands, only agricultural lands may be alienated. In
applying confirmation of title, the applicant has the burden of proving that
the public land has been classified as alienable and disposable. To do this,
the applicant must show a positive act from the government declassifying the
land from the public domain and converting it into an alienable and
disposable land.
In this case, the pieces of
evidence the Spouses Go adduced fall short of the requirements of the law.
First, the Spouses Go was required by the court but failed to present a
certified true copy of the original classification of the DENR Secretary.
Although a report and certification from CENRO was attached to the application,
this CENRO certification is issued only to verify the DENR Secretary issuance
through a survey. Thus, the CENRO Certification should have been accompanied by
an official publication of the DENR Secretary's issuance declaring the land
alienable and disposable. A CENRO certification, by itself, is insufficient to
prove the alienability and disposability of land sought to be registered.
Second, the Spouses Go have the
burden to show that the land for registration is alienable or disposable, which
they miserably failed to do so. Without the original land classification
approved by the DENR Secretary, the Spouses Go's application for registration
must be denied. The land remains inalienable.
No comments:
Post a Comment