Republic v. Metro Cebu Pacific Savings Bank
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Metro Cebu Public Savings Bank (Metro Cebu) and Cordova Trading Post, Inc. (Cordova Trading) filed separate applications for original registration of two parcels of land (Lot No. 325-A and Lot No. 325-B) in Cordova, Cebu. Cordova Trading claimed acquisition of Lot No. 325-B through exchange and sale from Benthel Development Corporation, which in turn bought it from Clodualdo Dalumpines. Metro Cebu claimed Lot No. 325-A was mortgaged by Dalumpines, subsequently foreclosed, and consolidated in its favor. Both claimed ownership and possession, along with their predecessors-in-interest, since 1967 or earlier, presenting supporting documents including tax declarations dating back to 1945 or earlier, tracing plans, technical descriptions, and CENRO certifications that the properties are alienable and disposable. Procedural History: The Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) granted the applications, finding that the applicants established ownership and possession over lands classified as alienable and disposable. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), arguing that the respondents failed to prove the required period of possession. The CA affirmed the MCTC's decision, finding that the evidence reflected the twin requirements of ownership and possession for at least 30 years and that the properties were alienable and disposable since 1974. The Petition: The OSG filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court, maintaining that the respondents failed to comply with Section 14(1) of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1529, specifically the requirement of open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in granting the respondents' Application for Original Registration of the subject properties, specifically regarding proof of possession and occupation since June 12, 1945. Whether the respondents sufficiently proved their entitlement to original registration of title under Section 14(1) of P.D. No. 1529, specifically regarding proof that the lands are alienable and disposable.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The Decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed and set aside. The applications for registration of original title to Lot Nos. 325-A and 325-B are denied for lack of merit.
Ratio Decidendi
On the failure to prove possession and occupation since June 12, 1945: The Court held that the respondents failed to establish possession of the subject properties since June 12, 1945, or earlier. The earliest tax declaration presented was from 1967 in the name of Dalumpines. While a 1948 tax declaration in the name of Pablo was presented, the respondents failed to establish Pablo's relationship to Dalumpines. Furthermore, tax declarations alone are insufficient to prove ownership; they must be coupled with proof of actual possession. The respondents miserably failed to prove actual possession by themselves or their predecessors-in-interest since the required date. The general statements of possession offered by witnesses were mere conclusions of law, not factual evidence of possession. Actual possession requires the manifestation of acts of dominion over the property as one would exercise over his own property. On the failure to prove that the lands are alienable and disposable: The Court emphasized that the respondents failed to sufficiently establish that the subject properties form part of the alienable and disposable lands of the public domain. The well-entrenched rule is that all lands not appearing to be clearly of private dominion presumably belong to the State, and the burden rests with the applicant to prove otherwise by incontrovertible evidence. The applicant must prove that the DENR Secretary had approved the land classification and released the land as alienable and disposable, and that the subject properties fall within the approved area, verified by survey. This requires presenting a copy of the original classification approved by the DENR Secretary, certified as a true copy. The respondents failed to present any evidence showing a positive act of the government declaring the subject properties as alienable and disposable, such as a presidential proclamation, executive order, administrative action, or legislative act. Absent this primary requisite, all other alleged compliances become irrelevant.
Main Doctrine
Applicants for original registration of title must prove not only possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier, but also that the land was declared alienable and disposable by a positive act of the government. Mere tax declarations and general claims of possession are insufficient without proof of actual possession and a clear governmental declaration of alienability.