Republic v. Dela Cruz
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondents, Spouses Reynaldo and Loretto dela Cruz, filed a petition for land registration covering Lot 7001, Cad. 450, with an area of 404 square meters. They claimed the land was part of the alienable and disposable public domain and that they had been in open, public, notorious, and continuous possession for over 34 years. They presented evidence including a Deed of Absolute Sale from 1981, tax declarations dating back to 1969, and testimonies from witnesses who corroborated their purchase and possession. A Special Investigator from the DENR's CENRO testified that the land was alienable and disposable. Procedural History: The Municipal Trial Court (MTC) granted the application, confirming and ordering the registration of title in favor of the respondents, finding compliance with Section 14(1) of P.D. No. 1529 based on their possession since before June 12, 1945, and the testimony of the CENRO Special Investigator. The Republic, through the OSG, appealed, arguing the application should fall under Section 14(2) of P.D. No. 1529, requiring an express government manifestation that the land is patrimonial. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the MTC ruling. The Republic filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court, reiterating its argument that the application falls under Section 14(2) due to the claimed possession since 1969, not June 12, 1945. The Petition: The Republic assails the CA's Decision and Resolution, arguing that the respondents' application for land registration should not have been granted due to insufficient proof that the land is alienable and disposable, specifically the lack of a DENR Secretary's certification.
Issue(s)
Whether the registration of the subject land is proper. Whether the respondents sufficiently proved that the subject land is alienable and disposable.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated September 24, 2014, and the Resolution dated October 5, 2015, of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 96427 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The application for registration of land filed by the spouses Reynaldo and Loretto dela Cruz is DENIED.
Ratio Decidendi
On the propriety of land registration and the sufficiency of proof for alienability and disposability: The Court held that the registration of land is governed by Section 14 of P.D. No. 1529. Section 14(1) applies to those in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious 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. Section 14(2) pertains to the acquisition of ownership of private lands by prescription or the registration of patrimonial property of the public domain acquired through prescription. In both scenarios, a fundamental requirement is the establishment of the land's nature as alienable and disposable. This is rooted in the Regalian Doctrine, which presumes that all lands not clearly appearing to be under private ownership belong to the State. On the sufficiency of proof for alienability and disposability: To prove that a land is alienable and disposable, a positive act from the Executive Department is indispensable. The Court reiterated its ruling in Republic v. T.A.N Properties, Inc., emphasizing that mere certifications from the CENRO or PENRO are insufficient. The applicant must present proof that the DENR Secretary has approved the land classification and released it as alienable and disposable. Furthermore, a copy of the original classification approved by the DENR Secretary, certified as a true copy by the legal custodian of official records, must be submitted. The Court noted that in Espiritu, Jr. v. Republic and Republic v. Bautista, this strict requirement was upheld, deeming a CENRO Certification insufficient and a DENR Certification stating the land's verification as alienable and disposable indispensable. In the present case, the respondents presented the testimony of a Special Investigator, a CENRO Report, a Survey Plan, and a Technical Description. However, these pieces of evidence do not constitute the required positive act from the Executive Department. The absence of a Certification from the DENR Secretary, manifesting the release of the subject land as alienable and disposable, means the respondents failed to discharge their burden of proof. The burden of proof that the land is alienable and disposable rests solely on the applicant and is not shifted by the mere fact that the petitioner did not present countervailing evidence. Consequently, the failure of the respondents to establish the first element for land registration—that the land is alienable and disposable—warrants the denial of their application.
Main Doctrine
To prove that land is alienable and disposable, a positive act of the Executive Department classifying the lands as such is necessary, requiring a Certification from the DENR Secretary approving the release of the land as alienable and disposable, and a verification that the land falls within the approved area. A CENRO certification alone is insufficient.