Republic of the Philippines vs. Banal na Pag-aaral Phil., Inc.

 [ G.R. No. 193305, January 27, 2021 ]

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:

Disposition:    The petition is DENIED. The Amended Decision dated January 8, 2010 and the Resolution dated August 3, 2010 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No. 82888 approving respondent Banal na Pag-aaral, Phil., Inc.'s application for original registration of the subject lot are hereby affirmed.

FACTS:

Respondent filed an Amended Application for Registration of Lot Nos. 2304 and 2312, Cad. 482-D Amadeo Cadastre (consolidated as Lot No. 9404) with an area of 57,989 square meters (sq. m.) situated in Barangay Dagatan, Amadeo, Cavite (subject lot) with the RTC, docketed as LRC Case No. TG-898. Respondent claimed ownership and actual possession of the subject lot on the ground of its continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation in the concept of an owner long before World War II, reckoned from the possession of its predecessors-in-interest, the Heirs of Hermogenes Bayot (vendors), who executed an Extrajudicial Partition of Estate with Deed of Absolute Sale dated September 4, 1997 (document of sale) conveying the same in its favor.

To prove its claim that the subject lot formed part of the alienable and disposable land of the public domain, respondent presented: (a) a Certification dated May 22, 2002 issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) – Community Environment and Natural Resources Office of Trece Martires City (CENRO) stating that the subject lot is not covered by any public land application; and (b) a copy of the approved Consolidated Plan Ccn-04-000320-D in the names of the vendors bearing the notation that the survey over the subject lot was done "inside alienable and disposable area per [Project] No. 5, [Land Classification] Map No. 3013, x x x."

On the other hand, to support its claim of possession in the concept of an owner prior to June 12, 1945, it presented documentary and testimonial evidence that: (a) the subject lot was previously owned by Hermogenes Bayot (Hermogenes); (b) no other person had laid any claim of ownership on the subject lot; (c) Hermogenes had been in possession of the subject lot since the early 1940s until his death; (d) Hermogenes held tax declarations in his name; (e) upon Hermogenes' death, was succeeded by his children, herein vendors, who sold the subject lot to respondent; and (f) respondent is in possession of the subject lot which is now covered by TD No. 97 13023.

ISSUES:

Whether or not respondent has: 

(a) possessed the subject lot for the length of time required by law; and 

(b) proven a registrable title thereto

RULING:

A. Respondent has sufficiently established that the subject lot is alienable and disposable.

Section 14 (1) of Presidential Decree No. (PD) 1529, otherwise known as the "Property Registration Decree," has three requisites for registration of title, viz.: (a) that the property in question is alienable and disposable land of the public domain; (b) that the applicants by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation; and (c) that such possession is under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945 or earlier.

Here, respondent presented: (a) the CENRO Certification stating that the subject lot containing an area of 57,989 sq. m. was "verified to fall within the Alienable or Disposable Land established under Project No. 5 per Land Classification Map No. 3013 (LC-3013) as approved and certified as such on March 15, 1982 under FAO No. 4-1656;" and (b) a certified copy of FAO No. 4-1656 of the then Minister of Natural Resources Teodoro Q. Peña, declaring as alienable and disposable/certain portions of the public domain situated in the Municipality of Trece Martires under LC Project No. 5 which is "designated and described as alienable and disposable in the [BFD] Map LC-3013."

The subject lot need not be alienable and disposable since June 12, 1945 or earlier.

Contrary to petitioner's postulations, the land sought to be registered need not have been declared alienable and disposable since June 12, 1945 or earlier in order for the applicant for registration to secure the judicial confirmation of its title. Such contention had already been declared as absurd and unreasonable in Republic v. Naguit. Registration under Section 14 (1) of PD 1529 is based on possession and occupation of the alienable and disposable land of the public domain since June 12, 1945 or earlier, without regard as to whether the land was susceptible to private ownership at that time. The applicant needs only to show that the land had already been declared alienable and disposable at any time prior to the filing of the application for registration, which respondent was able to do.

B. Respondent has established possession and occupation of the subject lot of the nature and duration required by law.

For purposes of land registration under Section 14 (1) of PD 1529, proof of specific acts of ownership must be presented to substantiate the claim of open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of the land subject of the application. Actual possession consists in the manifestation of acts of dominion over it of such a nature as a party would actually exercise over his own property. Possession is: (a) open when it is patent, visible, apparent, notorious, and not clandestine; (b) continuous when uninterrupted, unbroken, and not intermittent or occasional; (c) exclusive when the adverse possessor can show exclusive dominion over the land and an appropriation of it to his own use and benefit; and (d) notorious when it is so conspicuous that it is generally known and talked of by the public or the people in the neighborhood.

To prove that it and its predecessors-in-interest have been in possession and occupation in the concept of owner of the subject lot since June 12, 1945 or earlier, respondent presented, among others, the testimony of Melanio Ambat (Melanio). Melanio, who was born in 1927, categorically claimed: (a) to have known of Hermogenes' ownership of the subject lot when he was about 15 years old, or around 1941 before the Japanese-American war broke out, since they are barrio mates, their house being merely 15 meters away from each other; (b) that the subject lot used to be an agricultural land, as he in fact used to till and farm a portion thereof; and (c) that no other person had laid any claim of ownership on the subject lot. At 15 years of age, Melanio is undoubtedly capable and competent to perceive Hermogenes' possession of the subject lot in the concept of an owner, which knowledge was reinforced through the years – with the continued possession of Hermogenes' heirs, herein vendors, who tended to the subject lot prior to the sale to respondent – up until he testified in court in 2002 when he was 74 years of age. Considering further that the judge below is in a better position to pass judgment on the matter of credibility of the witnesses and their testimony, having personally heard the witnesses testify and observed their deportment and manner of testifying, his finding that such testimony was worthy of belief and credence deserve the highest respect.