Dir. of Lands vs CA Gr L-45168

8/9/2019 Dir. of Lands vs CA Gr L-45168

1/52

G.R. No. L-45168 January 27, 1981

THE DIRECTOR OF LND!, petitioner,vs.THE CO"RT OF ##EL! an$ DE%ETRI !T. %RI &D. DE 'ERNL, r()*on$(n+),GREENFIELD DE&ELO#%ENT COR#., n+(r(nor, L'NG DE&ELO#%ENT COR#. an$

R%ON D. 'GT!ING,intervenors.

Estelito P. Mendoza, Assistant Solicitor General, Jose F. Racela, Jr., and Antonio G. Castro, counselfor the petitioner.

G"ERRERO, J.:

Petition for Review on certiorari pursuant to Rule 45, Rules of Court, in relation to Republic Act 5440and/or a Special Civil Action of certiorari under Section 1, Rule 65, Rules of Court, petitioner claiin!no appeal nor an" ot#er plain, speed" and ade$uate reed" in t#e ordinar" course of law.

Petitioner pra"s t#is Court to reverse t#e decision dated %ctober 1, 1&'6 of respondent Court ofAppeals 1in CA().R. *o. 56'+&(R entitled -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal, petitioner(appellant,versus -irector of ands, Pedro de la Pe2a eode!ario R. Alba, 3r., Aurora R. avila, -eocrito R.avila, ufracia R. avila and An!el Cru, oppositors(appellants Re7 Petition for Reconstitution of%ri!inal Certificate of 8itle *o. 8(4+44&, Rial Re!istr" of -eeds and in lieu t#ereof to disiss t#epetition for reconstitution of title, to declare null and void t#e Resolution dated *oveber 11, 1&'6den"in! petitioner9s otion for a *ew period or :tension of 8ie to ile a otion forReconsideration and furt#er den"in! t#e otion to Adit otion for Reconsideration.

;n a petition dated and filed 3une 6, 1&'0 in t#e Court of irst ;nstance of Rial, private respondent-eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal sou!#t t#e reconstitution of t#e ori!inal of 8ransfer Certificate of

8itle *o. 1+/8('& of t#e Re!istr" of deeds of Rial coverin! two .506+ #ectares, ore or less. Attac#ed to t#epetition are t#e p#otostat cop" of t#e supposed owner9s cop" of 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 1+/8('&, t#e plan of t#e propert" to!et#er wit# t#e tec#nical description t#ereof, approved b" t#e C#ief oft#e Surve" -ivision of t#e ureau of ands.

8#e petition for reconstitution was set for #earin! on *oveber +?, 1&'0 at ?7>0 A.. after duepublication of t#e re$uired notice was ade. 8#e re$uired notice of #earin! was dul" publis#ed intwo successive issues of t#e %fficial )aette, ol. 66, *o. >1, pp. '++6('++', Au!. >, 1&'0, and ol.66, *o. >+, p. '4&>, Au!. 10, 1&'0, as follows7

RP@;C % 8 P;;PP;*S

C%@R8 % ;RS8 ;*S8A*C % R;BA

S*8 3@-;C;A -;S8R;C8

RA*C ;;;

Petition for Reconstitution of 8C8 *o. 1+,,8('&, and Records of Rial


2/52

-8R;A S8A. AR;A -A. - R*A, Petitioner

*%8;C % AR;*)

;n #er verified petition, -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal pra"s for t#ereconstitution of 8C8 *o. 1+/8('& coverin! ots ; and > of plan ;;(4>'4 situated in

San -ionisio, Parana$ue '4, RC Record *o. F=, situated in t#e arrio ofSan -ionisio, unicipalit" of Parana$ue, Province of Rial. ounded on t#e *E and*., alon! lines 1(+(>(4 b" propert" of anuela A$uial '4=D on t#e*E *., and *E alon! lines 4(5(6('(? b" propert" of %lipia . Sta. aria '4=D and on t#e *E SE., S and alon! lines &( 10(11(1+(1>(14(15(16(1'(1 b" Public and. Containin! an area of seven #undred seventeen t#ousand five#undred t#irt"(nine s$uare eters &=.

E#erefore, notice is #ereb" !iven t#at said petition will be #eard before t#is Court atPasi!, Rial on *oveber +?, 1&'0 at ?7>0 A.. at w#ic# place, date and #ouraforesaid, all interested persons are #ereb" cited to appear and s#ow cause, if an"t#e" #ave. w#" said petition s#ould not be !ranted.

et t#is notice be publis#ed once a weeG for > consecutive weeGs in t#e -ail" irror, as well as twice in successive issues of t#e %fficial )aette. iGewise, copies oft#is notice ust be posted in t#e bulletin board of t#e Provincial Capitol of Rialunicipal uildin! of untinlupa, Rial and on ot 1 and > before t#e #earin!.urt#erore, let copies of t#is notice be sent b" re!istered ail to anuela A$uial%lipia . Sta aria, 8#e -irector of ands, t#e land Re!istration Coissioner, t#eRe!ister of -eeds of Rial t#e Provincial iscal of Rial and t#e %ffice of t#e Solicitor)eneral.


3/52

Eitness t#e on. Pedro A. Revilla, 3ud!e of t#is Court, t#is ?t# da" of 3ul", 1&'0 atPasi!, Rial.


4/52

A parcel of land of plan ;;(4>'4, RC Record *o. situated in t#e arrio of San-ionisio, unicipalit" of Parana$ue, Province of Rial. ounded on t#e *E and *.,alon! lines 1(+(>(4 b" propert" of anuela A$uial '4=D on t#e *E*., and *E alon! lines 4( 5(6('(? b" propert" of %lipia . Santaaria ot 1 ofplan 11(4>'4=, and on t#e *E SE., and S alon! lines &(10( 11(1+(1>(14(14(16(1'(1 b" Public ands. Containin! an area of S* @*-R- S*8*

8%@SA*- ; @*-R- 8;R8I *;* &= SJ@AR 8RS.

>. F 8#at on t#e occasion of t#e ilitar" operations durin! t#e last world war, t#eori!inal of t#e above(entioned 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& in t#e %ffice oft#e Re!ister of -eeds was eit#er lost or destro"ed and despite dili!ent effortse:erted, proved to no availD #owever, t#e %wner9s -uplicate of said 8ransferCertificate of 8itle #ad been preserved b" t#e #erein petitioner and could be t#e basisof t#is petitionD

4. F 8#at t#e boundar" owners of t#e propert" above( described are as follows7anuela A$uial %lipia . Sta. aria and Public and, wit# Gnown residence atParana$ue, RialD

5. F 8#at t#e aforesaid 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle does not appear to #ave beenencubered e:cept to t#ose persons w#o i!#t in t#e future appear to #ave interestdurin! t#e pendenc" of t#is petitionD

6. F 8#at t#e followin! docuents are #ereto attac#ed as an inte!ral part #ereof, towit7

our


5/52

Suite 41> S#urdutld!.

;ntrauros, anila


6/52

ot 1, ;;(4>'4

A parcel of land '4, RC Record *o. situated in t#e arrio of San-ionisio, unicipalit" of Parana$ue (4(5 b" Public andD on t#e *E alon! lines 5(6('(?(&b" propert" of anuela A$uial '4= of t#e E anti S alon! lines &(

10(11 b" public landD on t#e S SE., and S alon! lines 11(1+(1>(14(15 b" propert"of %lipia . Santaaria ,4 plan ;;(4>'4=D on t#e S and SE., alon! lines 15(16(1 b" propert" of anuela A$uial '4=. Containin! an area ofS* @*-R- S*8* 8%@SA*- ; @*-R- 8E*8I 8R SJ@AR 8RS.

ot >, ;;(4>'4

A parcel of land of plan ;;(4>'4, RC Record *o. F=, situated in t#e arrio ofSan -ionisio, unicipalit" of Parana$ue, Province of Rial. ounded on t#e *., and*E alon! lines 1(+(>(4 b" propert" of anuela A$uial '4=D on t#e*E 9., *., and *E alon! lines 4(5(6('(? b" propert" of %lipia . Sta. aria '4=D and on t#e *E SE., S and alon! lines 0( 10(11(1+(1>(14(15(16(1'(1 b" Public and. Containin! an area of S* @*-R- S*8*8%@SA*- ; @*-R- 8;R8I *;* &= SJ@AR 8RS.

ER%R, notice is #ereb" !iven t#at said petition will be #eard before t#is courtat Pasi!, Rial on arc# ++, 1&'1 at ?7>0 A.. at w#ic# place, date and #ouraforesaid, all interested persons are #ereb" cited to appear and s#ow cause, if an"t#e" #ave w#" said petition s#ould not be !ranted.

et t#is notice be publis#ed once a weeG for > consecutive weeGs in t#e -ail"irror, as well as twice in successive issues of t#e %fficial )aette. iGewise,copies of t#is notice ust be posted in t#e bulletin board of t#e Provincial Capitol ofRial, and on ots 1 and > before t#e #earin!.

E;8*SS t#e on. Pedro A. Revilla, 3ud!e of t#is Court, t#is 't# da" of -eceber,1&'0 at Pasi!, Rial.


7/52

b. 8#at t#e Certificate of 8itle entioned in t#e petition is faGeto!et#er wit# all evidences entioned in said petitionD

c. 8#at t#e oppositor is t#e true owner of t#e parcel of land w#osecertificate of title is sou!#t to be reconstituted.

ER%R, it is respectfull" pra"ed t#at t#e petition be disissed.

Jueon Cit" for Pasi!, Rial, -eceber +0, 1&'0.

%ppositor Cru, #owever, never appeared at t#e #earin! and abandoned #is opposition.

%ppositors Aurora avila et al. also filed an opposition w#ic# was aended on April 1, 1&'1 but after-eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal presented part of #er evidence, said oppositors abandoned t#eiropposition and never appeared at subse$uent #earin!s.

%n arc# 16, 1&'1, t#e -irector of ands filed t#e opposition in be#alf of t#e !overnent, w#ic#was adopted as t#e %pposition also to t#e Aended Petition for Reconstitution. 8#e %pposition

alle!es7

1. F 8#at -eetria Sta. aria da, de ernal of Rosario, Pasi!, Rial seeGs t#ereconstitution of t#e %ri!inal 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 1+/8('& or 4+44&,coverin! two '4, alle!edl" approved on 3ul" +5, 1&11 b" t#e-irector of ands and described in t#e 8ec#nical -escriptions also alle!edl" issuedb" t#e Surve"s -ivision, ureau of ands under Accession *o. 1&5551, andcontainin! an area of 14>.506+ #ectares, ore or less and w#ic# said plan andtec#nical descriptions are attac#ed to t#e petitionD

+. F 8#at b" reconstitutin! t#e %ri!inal 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 1+/8('&, now

4+44& in t#e nae of t#e Petitioner usin! t#e said %wner9s 8ransfer Certificate of8itle as t#e basic source, is not feasible, because7


8/52

1 and does not s#owt#at 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 1+/8('& was dul" re!istered t#ereinD

'4on 3ul" +5, 1&1 1, is not t#e sae -irector of ands durin! t#e saeperiodD

?>? s$uare eters, surve"ed on -eceber 1&, 1&10 and

approved on ebruar" ', 1&11D obviousl" Plan 11(4>'4 is also a faGeDand

'4 as described in t#e alle!ed 8ec#nical-escriptions w#en proKected in cadastral aps falls outsideParana$ue Cadastre, Parana$ue, Rial.

4. F 8#at t#e a!!re!ate areas of ots *os. 1 and >, Plan 11( 4>'4 is 14>.506+#ectares and it is not iprobable t#at it will encroac# ot#er titled properties includin!


9/52

roads, public #i!#wa"s and even t#e unicipal all of untinlupa, RialD #ence arelocation surve" is necessar" to establis# t#e etes and bounds of t#e controvertedlands and its relative position in t#e localit"D

5. F 8#at as alle!ed b" t#e petitioner9s counsel in #is otion for Perission toAend Petition dated *oveber 1+, 1&'0, t#at t#e %wner9s -uplicate 8ransfer

Certificate of 8itle *o. 1+/8('& was tapered and t#at t#e real nuber appearin! ont#e sae is 4+44&, onl" creates t#e ipression t#at bot# alle!ed titles are faGe,to!et#er wit# t#e plan and tec#nical descriptions, uc# ore so t#at t#e said8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& is not attac#ed and ade part of t#e petition int#e e:pedients

6. F 8#at t#e petition for reconstitution of t#e %ri!inal 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o.1+/8('& na" 4+44& is not in accordance wit# t#e provisions of Section >, Republic Act*o. +6.

ER%R, it is respectfull" pra"ed of t#is onorable Court t#at t#e Petition toReconstitute 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 1+/8('& now 4+44&, be denied wit#

costs a!ainst t#e petitioner.

anila, for Pasi!, Rial, arc# 16, 1&'1.

%n Septeber 11, 1&'+, -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal pra"ed t#e Court for t#e wit#drawal oft#e p#otostat9 cop" of 8C8 *o. 1+/8('& and copies of t#e -ail" irror to!et#er wit# t#e affidavit ofpublication found on pa!es ++(+5 inclusive of t#e e:pediente, for #avin! becoe irrelevant,iaterial and of no furt#er use in t#e proceedin!s.

;n a anifestation dated Septeber 11, 1&'+, counsel for -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernalanifested t#at at t#e tie of t#e filin! of t#e petition for reconstitution of #er duplicate %wner9sCertificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& of t#e land records of Rial Province, said certificate was considered

lost and its w#ereabouts, could not be ascertainedD t#at said certificate #as been finall" recoveredrecentl" and is now in #er possessionD t#at accordin! to inforation furnis#ed #er b" t#e Re!ister of-eeds %ffice of Rial after soe $uer", t#e ori!inal of petitioner9s duplicate 8C8 *o. 4+44& is aon!t#ose issin! in t#e ooG of Certificates of 8itles turned over b" t#e Re!ister of -eeds of anila tot#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial. Counsel t#ereupon pra"ed t#at t#e petition be treated as one for t#ereconstitution of petitioner9s %ri!inal Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&.

8#e Court #avin! ordered on *oveber 16, 1&'+ t#e e:aination of t#e !enuineness of t#esi!nature of ariano illanueva, Re!ister of -eeds of anila, in t#e %wner9s duplicate cop" of8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& of petitioner b" t#e *ational ureau of ;nvesti!ation, t#e *;subitted on *oveber +4, 1&'+ to t#e court Juestioned -ocuents Report *o. 166(11'+, findin!t#at t#e si!nature of ariano illanueva appearin! in 8C8 *o. 4+44& of petitioner is !enuine.

%n *oveber 1&, 1&'>, t#e Court issued its %rder den"in! reconstitution of petitioner9s %ri!inal8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&. 8#e Court, dwellin! on t#e c#an!e in t#e nuber of -eetriaSta. aria da. de ernal9s Certificate of 8itle fro *o. 1+/8('& to 8C8 *o. 4+44&, said7

-urin! t#e #earin! of t#is case, petitioner -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernale:plained t#e circustances leadin! to t#e erroneous title sou!#t to be reconstitutedunder #er ori!inal petition. S#e testified t#at s#e and #er #usband, An!el Cru, wereseparated. -urin! t#e tie t#at t#e" were livin! to!et#er, s#e entrusted to #er#usband t#e owner9s cop" of t#e title coverin! t#is propert". Soetie after t#eir


10/52

separation, s#e deanded fro #er estran!ed #usband t#e owner9s cop" of #er titleover t#e propert" alle!edl" owned b" #er at San -ionisio, Parana$ue, Rial


11/52

report in pursuance to an order of t#is court. e testified t#at accordin! to t#eirrecords 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&, ooG 8(+14


12/52

Aon! t#e e:#ibits presented b" t#e petitioner are :#ibits 3, 3(1 and 3(+ :#ibit 3purports to s#ow a list contained in eleven


13/52

Re!ister of -eeds of anila did not affi: #is si!nature in suc# capacit" durin! t#e3apanese tie is a atter w#ic# is capable of verification.

8a: -eclaration *o. '046, :#ibit , w#ic# purports to #ave been issued soetie in1&4> does not bear t#e si!nature of t#e Provincial Assessor. 8ransfer Certificate of8itle *o. 4+44& s#ows on its face t#at t#e lots described t#erein were ori!inall"

re!istered on t#e +&t# da" of Septeber, 1&4+ b" virtue of a sales patent issued onSepteber 15,1&4+ under Act 141. :#ibit w#ic# appears to be an official receiptrepresentin! pa"ent for real estate ta:es correspondin! to 8a: -eclaration *o,'046 is supposed to be in pa"ent of t#e ta:es for t#e propert" in $uestion for t#eperiod fro 1&41 to 1&46. %n t#e basis of t#e title relied upon b" t#e petitioner, t#eori!inal title t#erefor was issued onl" on Septeber +&, 1&4+ and vet petitionerclais b" t#is docuent, :#ibit to #ave paid t#e ta:es correspondin! to t#ispropert" for t#e "ear 1&41 before #er predecessor(in(interest #ad alle!edl" ac$uiredt#e sae in 1&4+. 8a: -eclaration *o. 15>40 .


14/52

wit#out furt#er proofD t#at oppositors interposed no obKection w#en offered inevidence and petitioner rested #er case.

;n support of t#e otion for Reconsideration and *ew 8rial, counsel for -eetria ar!ued t#at 8C8*o. 1+/8('& and 8C8 *o. 4+44& are one and t#e sae certificate of title coverin! t#e sae ;denticalpropert" of -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernalD t#at w#at is faGe and false is erel" *o. 1+/8('&

w#ic# was t#e product of ac#ination of An!el Cru, t#e estran!ed #usband of -eetria andoppositor in t#e case w#o did not pursue #is opposition and instead filed a petition for reconstitutionof 8C8 8(1+ before ranc# in Reconstitution Case *o. '0D t#at 8C8 8('6 bein! reconstituted inReconstitution Case *o. '0 before ranc# is definitel" a faGe title and t#at it overlaps soe ?#ectares of -eetria9s propert" covered b" 8C8 4+44&D t#at 8C8 *o. 4+44& issued b" t#e Re!isterof -eeds of )reater anila was delivered and received b" t#e Re!ister of -eeds of RialD t#at t#ereare an" 8C8 *os. 4+44& is borne b" t#e practice of t#e office before t#e war, durin! t#e 3apaneseoccupation, and after liberation for t#e siple reason t#at eac# Re!ister of -eeds %ffice carriesseparate series fro *o. ; up so t#at t#e sae ;dentical nuber of 8C8 a" be issued b" differentRe!ister of -eeds coverin! different properties in t#e nae of different persons in differentprovinces.

Counsel for -eetria furt#er ar!ued t#at discussion about 8C8 *o. 1+/8('& is beside t#e point ofissueD t#at t#e onl" issue is w#et#er t#ere is 8C8 *o. 4+44& to be reconstitutedD t#at t#e seein!irre!ularities noted b" t#e Court are natural conse$uences of reconstitution recordsD t#at t#e Courtcoitted t#e error of considerin! records of Reconstitution *o. '0D t#at t#e Court9s fear t#at oret#an one certificate of title for t#e sae propert" will be issued is wit#out foundation in fact.

8#e alle!ed newl"(discovered evidence w#ic# a" alter t#e result of t#e decision is recited in t#eaffidavit of erit of -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal, t#us7

+. F 8#at subse$uent to t#e trial of t#is case, s#e discovered t#e followin! newevidence, w#ic# briefl" stated will establis# t#e followin! facts to wit7 t#at t#e propert"supposedl" covered b" %C8 *o. '6 involved in t#e decision of 3ud!e Re"naldo P.onrado in Reconstitution Case *o. '0 is different fro #er propert" covered b" 8C8

*o. 4+44&, obKect of t#is reconstitution proceedin!sD &6(>'4 findin! said si!nature to be !enuine.


15/52

earin!s were conducted and t#ereafter, on Septeber 1?, 1&'4, t#e Court denied reconstitution of-eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal9s %ri!inal 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 84+44&. ;n its denialorder, t#e Court said7

undaentall", t#e additional evidence presented b" petitioner in support of t#eirotion for new trial failed to au!ent t#eir ori!inal proof to warrant t#e reconstitution

of 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&. ;t erel", clarified certain aspectssurroundin! t#e transittal of various certificates of title fro t#e Re!ister of -eedsof anila to t#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial in Pasi!. 8#ere is stin no clear andconvincin! evidence to establis# or to prove t#at t#e ori!inal of 8ransfer Certificate of8itle *o. 4+44& in t#e nae of petitioner w#ic# is sou!#t to be reconstituted actuall"e:isted. 8#e Court still entertains a !rave and serious doubt as to t#e aut#enticit" of8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&, :#ibit C, subitted b" petitioner to supportt#eir stand. 8#e lists of certificates of title supposedl" received b" t#e Re!ister of-eeds of Rial fro t#e Re!ister of -eeds of anila on its face appears to besubKect to $uestion. 8wo .

S% %R-R-.

Pasi!, Rial, Septeber 1?, 1&'4.


16/52

rror ;;.F8#e 8rial Court erred in not acceptin! at its face value t#e aut#enticit" of%wner9s 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&, :#ibit C, and :#ibit 3 ofpetitioner( appellant and in not orderin! t#e reconstitution of t#e ori!inal of 8C8 *o.4+44& on t#e face of overw#elin! evidence establis#in! t#eir aut#enticit" and!enuineness, pursuant to t#e provisions of Republic Act *o. +67

rror ;;;.F8#e 8rial Court erred in considerin! t#e ori!inal petition in its order of*oveber 1&, 1&'> w#ic# is revived in its final order of Septeber 1?, 1&'4 w#ensae was aended and proceedin!s was #ad on t#e basis of t#e Aended Petitionof petitioner, and in drawin! unwarranted adverse conclusions on t#e basis of t#eori!inal petition wit#out an" evidentiar" support.

rror ;.F8#e 8rial Court erred in den"in! petitioner( appellant9s petition to wit#drawall anne:es to t#e ori!inal petition after t#e adission of t#e Aended Petition w#ic#replaced t#e ori!inal filed b" #er forer counsel.

rror .F8#e 8rial Court erred in not sustainin! petitioner( appellant9s otion to-isiss all %ppositions and in not #oldin! t#at t#e -irector of ands #as neit#er

interest in t#e case nor le!al personalit" to oppose t#e reconstitution of petitioner9slost ori!inal 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 8( 4+44& of t#e Rial Re!istr".

rror ;.F8#e 8rial Court erred in adittin! over petitioner9s obKection :#ibits ; to5(C, inclusive of lone oppositor -irector of ands and in drawin! conclusionst#erefro adverse to #erein petitioner(appellant.

rror ;;.F8#e 8rial Court erred in taGin! Kudicial notice of Reconstitution Case *o.'0 for reconstitution of a supposed lost 8C8 *o. 8('6 of An!el . Cru, estran!ed#usband of #erein appellant, before ranc# , 3ud!e Re"naldo P. onrado,presidin!, of t#e Court of irst ;nstance of Rial, in its ori!inal order of *oveber 1&,1&'> and its final order of Septeber 1?, 1&'4, w#en sae was never involved int#e #earin! of t#is caseD and in undertaGin! a private investi!ation of t#e case inviolation of appellant9s constitutional ri!#t to due process, and settled Kurisprudenceon t#e atter.

rror ;;;.F8#e 8rial Court, b" t#e series of its unwarranted actuations in t#e case atbar #as abused its Kudicial power and discretion to t#e !reat daa!e and preKudice of#erein petitioner(appellant.

rror ;.F8#e 8rial Court erred in aGin! various unwarranted conclusions adverseto #erein petitioner( appellant wit#out basis in fact and in law in its two c#allen!edorders subKect of t#is appeal.

rror .F8#e 8rial Court erred in concludin! petitioner9s evidence is insufficient and

in not orderin! t#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial to reconstitute petitioner(appellant9slost ori!inal Certificate of 8itle *o. 8(4+44& of t#e Rial Re!istr" pursuant to t#eprovisions of Republic Act *o. +6.

8#e Court of Appeals in its decision proul!ated %ctober 1, 1&'6 reversed and set aside t#e ordersof t#e lower Court issued *oveber 1&, 1&'> and Septeber 1?, 1&'5, and ordered t#e Re!ister of-eeds of t#e Province of Rial to reconstitute t#e ori!inal of 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& int#e records of t#is %ffice in t#e nae of -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal based upon #er


17/52

duplicate cop" of t#e title arGed as :#ibit C, taGin! into consideration t#e tec#nical descriptionsof t#e two , durin! t#e 3apanese%ccupation, t#e petitioner purc#ased fro #er ot#er, %lipia autista da. de Sta.aria, now deceased, t#e two parcels of land entioned and described in 8ransferCertificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& of t#e %ffice of t#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial e:#ibit C,older of :#ibits, p. '= for t#e su of P10,000.00. er ot#er9s title to t#e twoparcels of land was evidenced b" %ri!inal Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+>&+. 8#e deed ofsale, w#ic# #er ot#er e:ecuted in #er favor was destro"ed in a fire w#ic# occurreddurin! t#e fi!#t for t#e liberation of Pasi!, Rial. 8#e two parcels of land wasassessed in 1&4> at P16,&50.00


18/52

t#e for and t"pe of 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&D t#at t#e certification ofariano illanueva appearin! at t#e bacG of 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&. 8#e e:istence of natural variation c#aracteristics of natural writin!.

4. 8#e presence of fl"in! starts and vanis#in! points in careless anner.

5. 8#e e:istence of natural !radual evolution of developent of t#e si!natures as"ears passed.

6. 8#e e:istence of natural pen pressures and s#adin!s.

'. 8#e ;dios"ncracies of proportion of t#e letters as to sie, #ei!#t and lateralspacin!.

?. 8#e #abitual tendenc" of t#e letter desi!ns to decrease t#eir sies as t#e"

approac# t#e terinus of t#e si!natures.

&. 8#e consistent !eneral pro:iit" of t#e t"pewritten nae.

10. And ot#er ore si!nificant siilarities t#at a" be aplified w#ile in t#e witnessstand.

C%*C@S;%*7


19/52

;n view of t#e fore!oin!, t#e inevitable scientific conclusion t#at can be arrived at, ist#at t#e two , pp. 1?(1&, +?(+&=. Aon! t#e nuerous certificates oftitle covered b" t#e certification is 8C8 *o. 4+44& and opposite it is t#e nae-eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal, t#e #erein petitioner


20/52

8estif"in! in court even w#ile #e was weaG , 1&'4 0 and :#ibits S, S(1 to S(' under separate covers=, t#e pertinentportions t#ereof are copied in fun because of t#eir iportance, as follows7

;*-;*)S7

Scientific coparative e:aination between t#e $uestioned and t#e standardsi!natures under stereoscopic icroscope, #ad


21/52

;n view of t#e fore!oin!, t#e scientific conclusion arrived at is t#at t#e $uestionedsi!nature 3%S P. P@% appearin! in t#e aforeentioned RC;P8 dated April1, 1&4& is )*@;*.

*otwit#standin! all t#ese disinterested testionial and docuentar" evidencere!ardin! :#ibit 3, t#e trial court still doubted its !enuineness and aut#enticit"

because of t#e e:istence of anot#er alle!ed ?(pa!e receipt of certain certificates oftitle in t#e possession of t#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial )re!orio elas$ue


22/52

w#ic# was si!ned and certified true and correct b" C#ief odestoloria!a of t#e Reproduction Section of t#e ureau of ands in #istestion" of *oveber 10, 1&'+, reflected t#e true, correct andfait#ful reproduction of t#e fil as s#own in t#e Reader. 8#eproceedin!s were over at 11750 A , Plan ;;(4>'4, and #as t#erefore been approved under plan


23/52

lots covered b" 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& are ver" different fro t#etec#nical descriptions and areas of t#e lots covered b" %ri!inal Certificate of 8itle *o.8('6, t#e subKect atter of Reconstitution Case *o. '0 , 1&'+, of %scar 8. usebio, Re!ister of -eeds of Rial, tot#e effect7

1. 8#at a verification of our records s#ow t#at 8.C.8. *o. 4+44&, ooG8(+14 , si!ned b"ariano illanueva, Re!ister of -eeds of anila, sae was

forwarded to anila.

>. 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&, ooG 8(4?& and t#e ori!inal certificate of title on Septeber 15, 1&4+, bot# durin! t#e3apanese %ccupation. ence, neit#er of t#e is of pre(war or post( war vinta!e.

As e:plained b" witness *arciso Pena t#e Kurisdiction of anila durin! t#e 3apanese%ccupation was e:panded to cover t#e )reater anila area, w#ic# included t#eunicipalit" of Parana$ue, RialD and t#at t#e Re!ister of -eeds of anila was

issuin! durin! t#e 3apanese %ccupation t#e t"pe and for of title as 8C8 *o. 4+44&in t#e nae of t#e petitioner. 8#ere is not#in! surprisin! about t#e two certificates oftitle bearin! t#e sae nuber but in t#e naes of different owners, coverin!properties in different places, and issued at different periods of tie, as in t#e case atbar. %n t#is point, %scar 8. usebio #iself, testif"in! as a witness for t#e court,aditted on cross(e:aination t#at t#ere is not#in! unusual about t#is situation. etestified7

A88I. - %*


24/52

J F r. Eitness, is it not a fact t#at eac# province before, durin! andafter t#e war are carr"in! nubers of certificates of titles wit# serial


25/52

repeat it #ere for ep#asis t#at #er docuents, as supported b" parol evidence, areindeed ore t#an sufficient to warrant t#e reconstitution of t#e lost ori!inal of8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& issued in #er nae. S#e #as correctl" invoGedt#e pertinent provisions of Republic Act *o. +6. S#e is entitled to t#e benefitsprescribed t#erein.

Cop" of t#e above decision of t#e Court of Appeals was received b" t#e Solicitor )eneral on %ctober5, 1&'6 and t#e 15(da" period after w#ic# Kud!ent becoes final e:pires %ctober +0, 1&'6. ;t was,#owever, onl" on %ctober +1, 1&'6 t#at t#e Solicitor )eneral filed a otion for *ew Period to ileotion for Reconsideration alle!in! t#at t#e trial attorne", Antonio ). Castro, #ad prepared on%ctober 1&, 1&'6 a otion for :tension of 8ie to ile otion for Reconsideration butunfortunatel", t#e said otion for :tension was not actuall" filed wit# t#e Court as Appeals as it wasinadvertentl" attac#ed to ot#er papers, as per t#e affidavit dated %ctober +1 of said trial attorne",attac#ed to t#e otion for *ew Period.

A otion to Adit otion for Reconsideration was also filed b" t#e Solicitor )eneral in be#alf of t#e-irector of ands on *oveber +, 1&' 6 on t#e followin! !rounds7

;. 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& is not aut#entic.

;;. ;t was not proven t#at t#e ori!inal of 8ransfer certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& of t#e Re!istr" of-eeds of anila was transitted to t#e Re!istr" of -eeds of RialD and

;;;. 8#e owner9s duplicate of t#e 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44&, arGed :#ibit C, cannot bet#e basis for Kudicial reconstitution.

;n t#e Resolution dated *oveber 11, 1&'6, t#e Court of Appeals denied t#e otion for a *ewPeriod of >0 da"s to file a otion for Reconsideration for lacG of erit, sae #avin! been filedbe"ond t#e re!leentar" period and t#e reason advanced bein! frail and unsubstantial, andaccordin!l" t#e otion to Adit otion for Reconsideration was liGewise denied.

ence, t#e instant petition for review and/or a special civil action of certiorari under Rule 65, Section1, Rules of Court, t#ere bein! no appeal, nor an" ot#er plain, speed" and ade$uate reed" in t#eordinar" course of law.

;n t#e Resolution of -eceber 1>, 1&'6, t#e Supree Court resolved to re$uire respondents tocoent on t#e petition w#ic# t#e latter filed on 3anuar" +4, 1&''. Petitioner -irector of ands, filed#is Repl" on arc# 1', 1&'' and on April ++, 1&'', t#e Supree Court resolved to !ive due courseto t#e petition. Private respondent oved to reconsider w#ic# Ee also denied for lacG of erit in %urResolution of 3une 11, 1&''.

After nuerous e:tensions, t#e Solicitor )eneral filed t#e rief for t#e -irector of ands on*oveber +?, 1&'' on t#e followin! assi!nents of errors7

;. 8#e respondent court erred in #oldin! t#at private respondent9s cop" of 8ransferCertificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& of t#e Re!istr" of -eeds of Rial, arGed :#ibit C,was proven to be aut#entic.

;;. 8#e respondent court erred in #oldin! t#at t#e ori!inal of said 8ransfer Certificateof 8itle *o. 4+44& was proven to #ave been transitted to and received b" t#eRe!istr" of -eeds of Rial.


26/52

;;;. 8#e respondent court erred in !rantin! t#e reconstitution of private respondent9s8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& of t#e Re!istr" of -eeds of Rial despite t#eabsence of an" findin! t#at said title was in force at t#e tie it was alle!edl" lost.

;. 8#e respondent court coitted !rave abuse of discretion in den"in! petitioner9sotion for a *ew Period to ile otion for Reconsideration and t#e otion for

Reconsideration subse$uentl" filed.

Private respondent filed #er rief on -ec. +', 1&'', t#e Solicitor )eneral #is Repl" rief on a" 11,1&'?. Private respondent t#ereafter filed an @r!ent Petition to StriGe All Anne:es and/or ConsiderSae StriGen %ut dated a" +0, 1&'? followed b" Additional and Suppleental Ar!uent inSupport of Petition to StriGe filed a" +5, 1&'? contendin! t#at petitioner9s Anne:es A to (1?inclusive present purel" $uestions of fact and are for!otten evidence and s#ould not be consideredin t#e decision of t#is case on t#e erits.

Ee noted t#e above @r!ent Petition to StriGe and in %ur Resolution of 3une 14, 1&'?, Ee resolvedto declare t#e case subitted for decision.

%n -eceber ', 1&'?, a otion for eave of Court to ;ntervene was filed b" ;ntervenor )reenfield-evelopent Corp. alle!in!inter alia, t#e followin!.

1. 8#at intervenor )reenfield -evelopent Corporation is a corporation dul"or!anied and e:istin! under t#e laws of t#e P#ilippines wit# office address at RCuildin!, ?+ . de los Santos avenue, )reen#ills. andalu"on!, etro anilaD

+. 8#at intervenor is t#e re!istered owner of seven ,>6' s$uare eters, certified:ero: copies of t#e certificates of titles, coverin! and ebracin! t#e said parcels ofand issued in t#e nae of t#e intervenor are attac#ed to and ade an inte!ral part

#ereof as follows7

Anne: 1 F 8.C.8. *o. >66+&+

Anne: + F 8.C.8. *o. S(>?660

Anne: > F 8.C.8. *o. S(>?661

Anne: 4 F 8.C.8. *o. S(4>++&

Anne: 5 F 8.C.8. *o. S(4>+>0

Anne: 6 F 8.C.8. *o. &>&?0

>. 8#at t#e land covered b" t#e fore!oin! certificates of titles was ori!inall"re!istered on t#e +0t# da" of Septeber, 1&1>, in t#e Re!istration ooG of t#e %fficeof t#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial, olue A(', pa!e ?4, as %ri!inal Certificate of 8itle*o. 6?4, pursuant to -ecree *o. 455+ issued on Au!ust +', 1&10D in t#e nae of t#e)overnent of t#e P#ilippine ;slands coverin! and ebracin! t#e land ot#erwiseGnown as t#e untinlupa stateD a cop" of said %.C.8. *o. 6?4 is attac#ed #eretoas Anne: 'D


27/52

4. 8#at t#e intervenor and t#eir predecessors(in( interest #ave been in actual, open,continuous, adverse, notorious, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of t#e parcelsof land re!istered in its nae since tie ieorial up to t#e present tieD

5. 8#at respondent, -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal, is seeGin! reconstitution ofan alle!edl" lost ori!inal 8.C.8. *o. 8(1+/8'& later aended to reconstitution of lost

ori!inal 8.C.8. *o. 8(4+44& w#ic# was alle!edl" a transfer fro %.C.8. *o. 4+>&+issued b" virtue of a sales patent issued on Septeber +&, 1&4+ in t#e nae of%lipia Sta. aria, ot#er of t#e respondentD

6. 8#at t#e land supposedl" covered b" t#e certificate of title sou!#t to bereconstituted appears to consist of two #ectares, ore or less,and desi!nated as ots 1 H > of plan ;;(4>'4, t#e tec#nical descriptions of w#ic# areset fort# in t#e alle!ed 8C8 *o. 4+44&D

'. 8#at upon coparison of said tec#nical descriptions wit# t#ose described in t#ecertificates of titleD Anne:es 1 to 6 of t#e #erein intervenor, it appear t#at t#e land

supposedl" covered b" t#e certificate sou!#t to be reconstituted overlap and includesubstantial portions of ;ntervenor9s land covered b" t#e certificates of title, Anne:es1 to 6D t#e location and e:tent of t#e overlappin!, as platted on t#e basis of t#erespective tec#nical descriptions referred to, is s#own on t#e plan, arGed Anne:?, w#ic# is attac#ed #ereto and ade an inte!ral part #ereof,

?. 8#at intervenor, t#erefore, #as a substantial, aterial, proprietar", and le!alinterest in t#e subKect atter of t#ese proceedin!s w#ic# will be directl" andadversel" affected s#ould t#e petition for reconstitution of t#e respondent be !rantedD

&. 8#at intervenor, as well as ot#er owners and possessors of lands not onl" adKacentto, but in fact overlapped b", t#e land supposedl" covered b" t#e title sou!#t to bereconstituted, were entitled to personal notice of t#e petition for reconstitutionD suc#re$uireent of notice is Kurisdictional, bein! andated b" Section 1>, of Republic Act*o. +6, and t#e conse$uence of failure to copl" t#erewit# is t#at t#e court neverac$uires Kurisdiction to entertain and #ear t#e petition or render valid Kud!entt#ereon.

8#e salient feature of t#is et#od of Kudicial reconstitution underRepublic Act *o. +6 is a petition and a #earin! after two successiveinsertion in t#e %fficial )aete of t#e notice of #earin!. ;t partaGes oft#e nature of an ori!inal re!istration proceedin!s, personal service oft#e notice of #earin! to t#e adKoinin! owners and occupants bein!essential, as well as postin! of t#e notice in ain entrance of t#eProvincial and unicipal uildin!s w#ere t#e land lies at least t#irt"

da"s prior to t#e date of #earin!.


28/52


29/52

of t#e respondent. And because t#ese two certificates of title purports to include t#esae land, t#e earlier certificate of t#e intervenor s#ould prevail over t#e latercertificate of t#e respondent, as decided b" t#e Supree Court in t#e leadin! case ofe!arda us. Saleeb", >1 P#il 5&5( 5&6

;n successive re!istration, w#ere ore t#an one certificate is issued

in respect of a particular estate or interest in t#e land, t#e personclaiin! under t#e prior certificate is entitled to t#e estate or interestDand t#at person is deeed to #old under t#e prior certificate w#o ist#e #older of, or w#ose clai is derived, directl" or indirectl" fro t#eperson w#o was t#e #older of t#e earliest certificate issued in respectt#ereof. E#ile t#e acts in t#is countr" do not e:pressl" cover t#e caseof t#e issue of two certificates for t#e sae land, t#e" provide t#at are!istered owner s#all #old t#e title, and t#e effect of t#is undoubtedl"is t#at w#ere two certificates purport to include t#e sae re!isteredland, t#e #older of t#e earlier one continue to #old t#e title.

16. 8#at if reconstitution is !ranted, t#e intervenor and ot#er title #olders and

possessors overlapped b" t#e land covered b" t#e title sou!#t to be reconstitutedstand to be deprived of t#eir propert" and suffer irreparable inKur" in t#eir proprietar"ri!#ts. ut t#e !reater inKur" s#all be inflicted in t#e 8orrens S"stes of re!istration,for t#ere will be two #olders of certificates of title overlappin! eac# ot#er, t#us, t#ever" purpose of t#e 8orrens S"ste of Re!istration s#all be ne!ated. 8#eindefeasibilit" and stabilit" of t#e 8orrens S"ste will be in peril. And w#en t#is#appened, t#e c#aos t#at it will create will be unia!inable.

Anot#er otion for eave of Court to ;ntervene was liGewise filed on -eceber +&, 1&'? b";ntervenors Alaban! -evelopent Corporation and Raon -. a!atsin! on t#e followin! !rounds7

;. 8#at t#e onorable Court a $uo #as no Kurisdiction to !rant t#e Petition forReconstitutionD

;;. 8#at !rantin! ar!uendo, t#at t#e title sou!#t to be reconstituted is valid, w#ic# it isnot, t#e sae cannot prevail over t#e earlier title of #erein intervenors or t#eirpredecessors(in(interestD

;;;. 8#at intervenors stand to be divested of t#eir propert" and t#ereb" suffer special,iediate, direct and irreparable inKur" in t#eir proprietar" ri!#t, if reconstitution is!ranted.

Private respondent opposed bot# otions for intervention. ;n t#e Resolution of Septeber +5, 1&'?,t#e Supree Court !ranted t#e intervention sou!#t for and ruled in t#e dispositive portion, t#us7

PR;SS C%*S;-R-, in view of t#e #i!#er and !reater interest of t#e publicand in order to adinister Kustice consistent wit# a Kust, speed" and ine:pensivedeterination of t#e respective clais of t#e parties and t#eir nuerous successors(in(interest, t#e otions for intervention are #ereb" !ranted.

8#e Court directs t#e C#ief of t#e Surve" -ivision of t#e ureau of ands or #is dul"aut#oried representative wit# due notice to t#e parties and in t#eir presence or t#atof t#eir dul" aut#oried representatives to conduct a relocation of t#e respectiveboundaries of t#e properties claied b" t#e ovants and t#e private respondent


30/52

wit#in &0 da"s after notice and #is fees s#all be borne e$uall" b" t#e parties andt#ereafter to subit to t#is Court t#e result of suc# relocation surve", indicatin!t#erein suc# overlappin! as #e a" #ave found and deterined and t#e location ofsuc# industries, factories, ware#ouses, plants and ot#er coercial infrastructures,residential buildin!s and ot#er constructions, public or private roads, and ot#erlandarGs found wit#in t#e areas concerned.

S% %R-R-.

Private respondent9s otion for Reconsideration of t#e Resolution referred to above was denied b"@s for lacG of erit on %ctober 15, 1&'&.

Pursuant to said Resolution of Septeber +5, 1&'?, t#e C#ief of t#e Surve"s -ivision, ureau ofands, infored intervenor Raon -. a!atsin! t#at t#e relocation( verification surve" will beconducted on %ctober 1?, 1&'& and to furnis# t#e !eodetic en!ineer all pertinent inforation in #ispossession relatin! to said surve". Siilar notices were liGewise sent to Att". -ennis An!eles,counsel for intervenor )reenfield -evelopent Corp., and to Att". ortunate de eon and Associatesas counsel for private respondent. 8#e latter, #owever, infored t#e Supree Court in #is

:ception and anifestation filed %ctober +4, 1&'& t#at private respondent is financiall" incapablefor t#e present to s#are in t#e e:penses of t#e surve" because of treendous e:pense incurred b"#er alread" and trouble durin! all t#ese "ears t#at t#e case #ad been pendin! and t#at no $uestionon t#e ;dentit" of #er propert" was ever raised and so far as s#e is concerned, t#ere is no need of asurve" or relocation after t#e and Re!istration Coission #ad verified t#e plan and certified t#att#ere is no conflict.

%n *oveber 4, 1&'&, t#e %fficer ;n(C#ar!e, *ational Capital Re!ion, ureau of ands, etroanila filed in be#alf of t#e -irector of ands a Report to t#e Supree inforin! t#at t#e -irector ofands issued a directive to t#e C#ief, Surve"s -ivision, *CR, ureau of ands, anila, for t#erelocation surve" of t#e properties involved in t#e case w#ic# was ipleented b" t#e C#ief,8ec#nical Service -ivision, w#o subitted a proKect profile t#ereonD t#at Att". ortunato de eon,counsel for t#e private respondent, was advised to reit t#e aount of P+4,000.00 to t#e Re!ional

%fficer as surve" deposit and also to furnis# t#e Surve" 8ea wit# all pertinent inforation w#ic#a" be used in connection wit# t#e surve", but Att". de eon replied, statin! t#at t#e" are notinterested in t#e atter as t#e propert" of #is client #as been properl" surve"ed and t#e surve" #asbeen dul" approved b" t#e and Re!istration %ffice.

@nder date of -eceber &, 1&'&, a otion for eave to ;ntervene was filed b" a!lana H Sonsana!eent Corporation and rancisco ). Arti!o alle!in! to #ave le!al interest in t#e atter inliti!ation in t#e above(entitled case and in t#e success of t#e private respondent w#o is t#eir vendorand are situated as to be adversel" affected b" t#e clai of intervenors, Alaban! -evelopent Corp.and Raon -. a!atsin!. 8#e otion was opposed b" private respondent -eetria Sta. aria da.de ernal and in %ur Resolution of arc# 1&, 1&?0, Ee denied t#e otion for ;ntervention as well ast#e otion for Reconsideration.

A inal Report dated ebruar" +5, 1&?0 was subitted to t#e Supree Court b" Aante R. -ua!%fficer(;n( C#ar!e, *CR, ureau of ands, anila, in copliance wit# %ur Resolution of Septeber+5, 1&'&. Said inal Report states7

;*A RP%R8


31/52

C%S *%E t#e %fficer(in(C#ar!e, *ational Capital Re!ion, ureau of ands,anila, and unto t#is onorable Court in copliance wit# t#e Resolution datedSepteber +5, 1&'& respectfull" subit #is followin! final report7

1. 8#at t#is report suppleents t#e previous report #e #as subitted to t#eonorable Court dated *oveber 10, 1&'&.

+. 8#at as so directed in t#e resolution of t#e court t#e private respondent -eetriaSta. aria da. de ernal, t#ru t#e counsel, was notified and assessed of #ercorrespondin! s#are of t#e surve"in! fees prescribed b" t#e rules and re!ulation oft#e ureau of ands, but notwit#standin! t#e notice sent to #er s#e failed to depositt#e re$uired feesD

>. 8#at w#ile aGin! a researc# on t#e surve" data of t#e lands involved in t#is caset#e surve"ors of t#e ureau of ands found out t#at t#e properties claied b" privaterespondent -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal consistin! of ots 1 and >, Plan 11(4>'4, does not #ave an ori!inal cop" of a plan in t#e Records -ivision of t#e ureauof ands. Attac#ed wit# t#is Report is a certified p#oto cop" of a letter dated 3anuar"

>0, 1&'? arGed as Anne: A to for an inte!ral part of t#is Report sent b" t#e StaffSupervisor for 8ec#nical Plan and Standards, ureau of ands, anila, addressed tot#e %fficer(in(C#ar!e, Re!ion ;, ureau of ands, etro anila inforin! t#e latterof t#e non(e:istence of t#e ori!inal cop" of plan 11(4>'4. owever, #e furt#erinfored t#at t#ere e:ist a icrofil cop" of plan 11(4>'5 wit# Accession *o.>?56>', but #e e:pressed #is doubts as to its source and aut#enticit", and !ive #isreasons for #is appre#ension in #is aforeentioned letter dated 3anuar" >0, 1&'? tot#e %fficer( ;n(C#ar!e of Re!ion ;, etro anilaD

4. 8#at all t#e parties in t#e above(entitled case were notified b" t#e ureau of andsSurve" 8eas of t#e date and tie of t#e verification/relocation surve" of t#e landsinvolved, but onl" )reenfield -evelopent Corporation and Alaban! -evelopentCorporation, t#ru t#eir representatives, attended t#e field surve" bein! conducted.

Private respondent -eetria Sta aria da. de ernal did not appear as re$uesteddurin! t#e surve"D

5. 8#at attac#ed also wit# t#is Report are t#e certified p#oto copies of t#e surve"reports dated -eceber +?, 1&'& and 3anuar" +, 1&?0 arGed as Anne:es andC respectivel" subitted b" t#e two Surve" 8eas of t#e ureau of ands, *ationalCapital Re!ion, anila, and w#ite print copies , plan 11(4>'4 claied b" private respondent -eetria Sta. aria da. deernal does not actuall" e:ist on t#e !round,

'. 8#at t#e properties claied b" private respondent Sta. aria da. de ernalconsistin! of ots 1 and >, Plan ;;(4>'4, were platted on t#e plan s(04(00015>


32/52

usin! t#e :ero: copies of uncertified tec#nical descriptions furnis#ed b" t#e %ffice oft#e Solicitor )eneralD

?. 8#at as directed b" t#is onorable Court, t#e location of industries, factories,ware#ouses, plants and ot#er coercial infrastructures, residential buildin!s, publicor private roads and ot#er landarGs found inside t#e areas concerned are properl"

indicated on t#e w#ite print copies of plan s(04(00015> situated in Parana$ue, etro anila, please be infored oft#e followin!.

1. ;nventor" record booG of t#e aps and plans salva!ed after t#e last world war andsubse$uentl" icrofiled durin! t#e oo Alien and ailton Consultanc", clearl"s#ows t#at Plan ;;(4>'4 was not aon! t#ose salva!ed. ;ndeed, t#ere is no cop" oft#is plan in t#e file of 8ec#ical Reference Section w#ic# records were recentl" turnedover to t#e Records -ivision. A perusal of t#e folder of t#e case in t#e Records-ivision also s#ows t#at on 3ul" 1', 1&'+ r. )abriel Sansano t#e t#en C#ief of t#e

records division certified t#at #is division '4 of t#e folio=.

+. A furt#er perusal of t#e records of ;;(4>'4 alle!edl" approved on 3ul" +5, 1&11. 8#is record was subitted to t#e courtStated t#erein is t#e alle!ed source of data Accession *o. 1&555 1. 8#is record turnsout to be Plan ;;(4005 approved on ebruar" ', 1&11 and t#e land is t#e propert" ofunicipalit" of iloan ;sland of Pandan, Province of e"te.


33/52

>. Apparentl" because of t#is findin!, on *oveber 5, 1&'1, r. Anselo Alaan,t#en C#ief of Reconstruction Section upon re$uest of t#e interested part", issuedtec#nical descriptions for ots 1 and > of ;;(4>'4. '4. As to #ow arecord t#at was not salva!ed after t#e war !ot icrofiled is a "ster". urt#erore,as to #ow t#is frae is pinpointed wit#out t#e locator card indeed confound us. Eeare not now priv" to t#e testionies ade in Court re!ardin! t#is icrofil.

5. Ee are surprised to learn t#at Reel *o. 560 now bears 114>'4. or t#is reason,we caused t#e preparation of an enlar!eent of said icrofil for furt#er

e:aination and evaluation.

6. A closer e:aination of said icrofil enlar!eent s#owed t#e followin!si!nificant discrepancies and deviations fro siilar surve" plans on record7

a= 8#e data of approval appears to be 3ul" +5, 1&11 and t#esi!nature appearin! as t#e approvin! official '4 is not t#e sae official approvin! plansdurin! t#e period. Saples of surve"s and inventoried ori!inal surve"plans on file in t#is ureau clearl" s#ow t#at on 3ul" +5, 1&11 ort#ereabouts t#e Actin! -irector of ands and t#erefore properapprovin! official for surve" plans was 3o#n R. Eilson. 8#e followin!ori!inal plans 6 ( do(

>. ;;(4141

>?5'>5 ( do(

4. ;;(4110

>?5?>> ( do(

5. ;;(4110/

>?5?>+ ( do(

6. ;;( >?5?>4 ( do(


34/52

4110 (

'. ;;(41100 $

>?5?>0 ( do(

?. ;;(4110 0

>?5?+& ( do(

&. ;;(4110

>?5?+? ( do(

10. ;;(4?&'

1?6+++ ( do(

11. ;;(416&6

3ul" 11,1&11

1+. ;;(41'+ 0

3ul" 5,1&11

1>. ;(

1415

>'&51> 3ul" +5,

1&11

14. ;;(1410

446&>6 Au!.++,1&11

b= Aut#entic plans liGe t#at of ;;(4?5? . owever, durin! #is ter of office, t#e t#en

Assistant -irector of ands in t#e person of 3o#n R. Eilson #ad occasion to assueduties as Actin! -irector of ands as evidenced b" t#e above(listed surve" plansostl" approved on 3ul" +5, 1&11 b" Actin! -irector of ands 3o#n R. Eilson.Considerin! t#e fact t#at on various dates wit#in t#e ont# of 3ul" 1&1 1, specificall"t#ose of 3ul" +5, 1&11, t#e ori!inal surve" plans available in t#e file s#ow 3o#n .Eilson as t#e approvin! official in #is capacit" as Actin! -irector of ands, and t#eobservation t#at t#e si!nature appearin! on icrofil 11(4>'4 is ver" far fro t#e!enuine si!nature of t#e incubent -irector of ands C#as . Sleeper, t#eappearance now of t#e icrofil of 11(4>'4 purportedl" approved on 3ul" +5, 1&11s#owin! C#as . Sleeper as t#e approvin! official is #i!#l" $uestionable. or t#isreason and t#e facts stated elsew#ere in t#is eorandu, we cannot certif"aut#enticit" of t#e icrofil cop" of 11(4>'4.

c= 8#e for used for t#e $uestionable plan 11(4>'4 differs fro t#e standard surve"plans approved durin! t#e tie


35/52

?56>',our conclusion is t#at said plan is not aut#entic and does not and #as neverrepresented an" parcel of land properl" surve"ed and approved b" t#is ureau.

?. *evert#eless, our investi!ation is still continuin! purposel" to find out #ow t#e

frae of suc# icrofil !ot inserted into icrofil Reel *o. 560 of t#is ureau.

&. Records of t#e Case s#ow t#at t#is was #andled b" t#e late Att". Pedro lores incollaboration wit# Assistant Solicitor )eneral Ricardo . Pronove, 3r. and 8rial

Attorne" Antonio ). Castro. 8#is pertains to t#e petition of -eetria Sta. aria da.de ernal for t#e reconstitution of 8.C.8.


36/52

A**

S@3C87 erification(Relocation Surve" of t#e boundariesclaied b" t#e ovant and private respondent asper resolution of t#eSupree Court, irst -ivision,etro anila under ).R. *o. (4516? dated 15

Septeber 1&'&.

+? -eceber 1&'&

8#e Re!ional -irector8#ru t#e %;C, Surve"s -ivisionureau of ands, *CR, etro anila

S i r7

Eit# reference to "our %ffice eo dated 5 %ctober 1&'& as per surve" order dated4 %ctober 1&'&, issued b" t#e -irector of ands pursuant to t#e %rder of t#e

Supree Court, t#is tea was directed to e:ecute t#e verification( relocation surve"of t#e lots involved relative to t#e above( noted subKect, #as t#e #onor to subit itsactivities, findin!s and report to wit7

1. 8#at iediatel" after receivin! t#e %ffice eo dated 6 %ctober 1&'&, t#e dataneeded were !at#ered and researc#ed in order to deterine t#e surve" deposit to bes#ouldered b" t#e private respondent and intervenors.

+. 8#at on 11 %ctober l&'&, Att". -ennis . An!eles, Counsel for )reenfield-evelopent Corporation, Att". Raon -. a!atsin!, Sr. and Associates, Counselfor Alaban! -evelopent Corporation and ortunato de eon and Associates werenotified to deposit t#eir s#are to be incurred in t#e e:ecution of verification(relocation

surve".

>. 8#at on 16 %ctober 1&'&, )reenfield -evelopent Corporation deposited t#eirs#are of surve" deposit to t#e *ational Capital Re!ion, ureau of ands, etroanila, liGewise, Alaban! -evelopent Corporation also deposited t#eir s#are ofsurve" deposit. owever, t#e private respondent failed to deposit an" aount to t#isRe!ion as of t#is date.

4. 8#at on %ctober 1&'&, t#e private respondent and intervenors were notified b"letter as to t#e tie and date, t#is surve" tea s#all coence its actual fieldverification surve". ;t is noted t#at onl" Att". Re"naldo . 8ato" of Alaban!-evelopent Corporation w#o acts as representative was present to!et#er wit# Att".-ennis . An!eles, Counsel for )reenfield -evelopent Corporation. ;n t#isinstance, no representatives of t#e private respondent were present to witness ourverification and relocation surve". -ue to t#is, t#e Alaban! -evelopent Corporationand )reenfield -evelopent Corporation properties were surve"ed and verified asper t#eir clai pinpointed b" t#e.

5. 8#at t#e verification(relocation surve" was e:ecuted in accordance wit# t#ee:istin! rules and re!ulations of t#e P#ilippine and Surve"or9s anual.


37/52

6. 8#at t#e surve" was tied to a reference point of Gnown !eo!rap#ic positions. Solarobservation were observed to !et t#e true direction of t#e tertiar" traverse stationsw#ic# control t#e different properties affected b" ots 1 H >, 11(4>'4.

'. 8#at t#e surve" was started last %ctober +4, 1&'& and was finis#ed last -eceber+4, 1&'&.

?. owever, t#at ots ; H >, 11(4>'4 were also surve"ed and verified even wit#outt#e presence of t#e ovant or an" of #er aut#oried representatives to pinpoint t#ee:tent of #er properties. And as per our verification surve", it was ascertained in t#epreises t#at t#e parcels of land described in t#e tec#nical descriptions of ots 1 H>, 11(4>'4 could not be located in t#e localit" b" all tec#nical eans.

&. 8#at ots 1 H >, ;;(4>'4, were plotted basin! onl" on t#e t"pewritten and :ero:copies of uncertified tec#nical descriptions furnis#ed to t#is %ffice b" t#e %ffice of t#eSolicitor )eneral.

10. 8#at t#e coplete surve" returns is in pro!ress and will be subitted for final

approval.

er" trul" "ours,


38/52

t#e aforeentioned Supree Court Resolution, w#ic# was undertaGen b" anot#ersurve" part" #eaded b" n!r. Anacieto illones, also of *CR, ureau of ands. 8#eworG was successfull" carried out as per t#e attac#ed %peration Plan of Activitiespreviousl" prepared and strictl" in accordance wit# t#e provisions of t#e P#ilippineand Surve"ors anual.

At t#e start, t#e two surve" parties adopted a coon tertiar" traverse line w#ere allsucceedin! necessar" traverses #ad to start. Also in t#e coputation of t#e subKectlots a coon s"ste was adopted for )reenfield -evelopent Corporation and

Alaban! -evelopent Corporation. ;t was also a!reed t#at t#e verification(relocationsurve" of t#e alle!ed ots ; H >, 11( 4>'4 #ad to be undertaGen b" t#e surve" tea#eaded b" n!r. illones. -urin! t#e surve" of )reenfield -evelopent Corporationproperties, Att". -ennis An!eles appeared on be#alf of t#e corporation.

Eit# respect to t#e instruction of indicatin!/w#et#er infrastructure and ot#erdevelopents/iproveents t#ere are wit#in t#e area subKect of t#e surve", t#eundersi!ned found out t#at aside fro two concrete buildin!s, one a sc#ool(#ouseand t#e ot#er a factor", all t#e rest of t#e area is eit#er co!onal or planted to

su!arcane.

All t#e lots coprisin! t#e )reenfield -evelopent Corporation properties areadKacent to eac# ot#er and as a w#ole it is delineated alon! t#e western, nort#ernboundaries and a portion of its sout#ern boundar" b" concrete walls.

;t is to be entioned also t#at durin! t#e surve" no #ostile interruption of w#ateverGind or anner #ad been e:perienced b" an"one in t#e surve" part". 8o t#is, we#ubl" e:press our sincere appreciation.

er" trul" "ours,


39/52

an interest in t#e controvers" or subKect atter t#at a final adKudication cannot be ade in t#eirabsence wit#out affectin! suc# interests.

Siilarl", intervenors Alaban! -evelopent Corp. and Raon -. a!atsin!, coented t#at saidreport confirs t#at t#e parcels of land of t#e intervenors dul" re!istered in t#eir naes and w#ic##ave been in t#eir possession since tie ieorial, actuall", continuousl", adversel", openl",

notoriousl" and peacefull" and for w#ic# t#e" #ave been pa"in! realt" ta:es up to t#e present tie,are overlapped b" t#e parcels of land alle!edl" owned b" t#e respondent w#ose title t#ereto is bein!sou!#t to be reconstituted.

8o respondent9s Coent t#at t#e basis of t#e surve" is erroneous for t#e" were looGin! for t#erecord, icrofil, and t#e plan in t#e nae of -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal, and not t#eori!inal !rantee %lipia autista da. de Sta. aria ;ntervenor )reenfield -evelopent Corp.interposed a ReKoinder, pointin! out t#at t#e basis of t#e surve" is Plan 114>'4 fro w#ic# t#edescriptions of ots ; and > were taGen and ade t#e basis of respondent9s petition for reconstitutionand t#at t#e nae of -eetria Sta. aria da, de ernal is entioned in t#e report onl" to ;dentif"t#e, claiant.

)reenfield9s ReKoinder also disputes respondent9s clai t#at t#e inal Report is incoplete andunreliable, stressin! t#at t#e continuin! investi!ation was to find out #ow t#e for!er" coitted fort#e report concluded t#at t#e for!er" was alread" an accoplis#ed fact. )reenfield also e:plain,,Dt#at t#e report sipl" eans t#at ots ; and > of Plan 11(4>'4 e:ist onl" on paper but w#en locatedon t#e !round. usin! t#e tec#nical description as basis, will fall and overlap t#e land of t#eintervenors and ot#er parties. urt#erore, t#e protest of respondent Sta. aria t#at #er propert"was platted usin! t#e :ero: copies of uncertified tec#nical description furnis#ed b" t#e %ffice of t#eSolicitor )eneral is unfounded for t#e siple reason t#at t#e tec#nical description furnis#ed b" t#eSolicitor )eneral is but a plain cop" of :#ibits ) and )(+ =.

8#e basic and priar" le!al principle upon w#ic# t#e validit" and le!alit" of all t#e proceedin!s taGenand conducted upon t#e filin! of t#e ori!inal petition for reconstitution of t#e alle!ed lost Certificate of8itle *o. 8C8 1+/8('& w#ic# was subse$uentl" aended to c#an!e t#e nuber of t#e said certificate

of title to 8C8 *o. 4+44& is Kurisdiction t#e power of t#e court to act on said petition for reconstitution.8#e $uestion of Kurisdiction is alwa"s fundaentalD it is basicall" one of law, involvin! t#edeterination b" t#e court of its ri!#t to proceed wit# t#e liti!ation or petition. 3urisdiction is t#eaut#orit" to #ear and deterine a cause t#e ri!#t to act in a particular case, ;ts e:istence does notdepend upon t#e re!ularit" of its e:ercise or upon t#e correctness or ri!#teousness of t#e decisionor rulin! ade b" t#e court 66, a" 1&,1&66, 1' SCRA &'=. 3urisdiction a" be c#allen!ed at an" sta!e of t#e proceedin!s e:cept w#eresound public polic" dictates t#at to do so would be to speculate on t#e fortunes of liti!ation+ SCRA 54=. 3urisdiction liGewise cannotbe conferred b" lac#es, estoppel or even consent of t#e parties %tibar H %tibar vs. on. -eetrioinson et al., 1?0+>, a" >0, 1&6+, 5 SCRA +'0, +'>=.

3urisdiction over t#e subKect atter is conferred onl" b" t#e Constitution or law. ; cannot be fi:ed b"will of t#e partiesD it cannot be ac$uired t#rou!#, or waived, enlar!ed or diinis#ed b", an" act oroission of t#e parties, neit#er is it conferred b" ac$uiescence of t#e court. , 5>1D see alsoConcurrin! opinion of 3ustice Pablo in Resolution on otion for Reconsideration in Avelino vs.Cuenco, ?> P#il. 1', '4D S$uillantini vs. Republic, ?? P#il. 1>5, 1>'D Crucosa vs. Concepcion, 101P#il. 146, 150D upa" vs. oscoso, ( 14'+>, a" +&,1&5&D spiritu vs. -avid, (1>1>5>6, a">1, 1&61=.


40/52

;n Manila Railroad Co. s. Attorne!"General, supra, t#e Supree Court speaGin! t#ru 3usticeoreland elucidates t#e ver" fine distinctions on t#e concept of Kurisdiction, t#us7

Certain statutes confer Kurisdiction, power or aut#orit". %t#ers provide for t#eprocedure b" w#ic# t#at power or aut#orit" is proKected into Kud!ent. 8#e one classdeals wit# t#e powers of t#e court in t#e real and substantive senseD t#e ot#er wit#

t#e procedure b" w#ic# suc# powers are put into action. 8#e one is t#e t#in! itselfDt#e ot#er is t#e ve#icle b" w#ic# t#e t#in! is transferred fro t#e court to t#e parties.

8o ascertain w#et#er a court #as Kurisdiction or not, t#e provisions of t#e law s#ould be in$uired into, 3ul"1&, 1&'1, 40 SCRA >'=. And w#en t#e court a $uo lacGs Kurisdiction to taGe co!niance of a case,t#e sae lacGs aut#orit" over t#e w#ole case and all its aspects 0, 1&'+, 45 SCRA 1'&, 1?'=.

urt#er, absent Kurisdiction t#e court cannot pass upon t#e erits of t#e petition Pina vs. Aldovino+5 SCRA ++0, ++4=.

;n t#e case at bar, t#e Kurisdiction or aut#orit" of t#e Court of irst ;nstance is conferred upon it b"Republic Act +6 entitled An act providin! a special procedure for t#e reconstitution of 8orrensCertificates of 8itle lost or destro"ed, approved on Septeber +5, 1&46. 8#e Act specificall"provides t#e special re$uireents and ode of procedure t#at ust be followed before t#e court canact on t#e petition and !rant to t#e petitioner t#e reed" sou!#t for. 8#ese re$uireents andprocedure are andator". 8#e petition for reconstitution ust alle!e t#e Kurisdictional factsD t#enotice of #earin! ust also be publis#ed and posted in particular places and t#e sae sent tospecified persons. Specificall", t#e re$uireents and procedure are set fort# in detail under Sections1+ and 1> of t#e Act w#ic# read as follows7

Sec. 1+. Petitions for reconstitution fro sources enuerated in sections +


41/52

a certified cop" of t#e description taGen fro a prior certificate of title coverin! t#esae propert".

Sec. 1>. 8#e court s#all cause a notice of t#e petition, filed under t#e precedin!section, to be publis#ed, at t#e e:pense of t#e petitioner, twice in successive issuesof t#e %fficial )aette, and to be posted on t#e ain entrance of t#e unicipalit" or

cit" in w#ic# t#e land is situated, at t#e provincial buildin! and of t#e unicipalbuildin! at least t#irt" da"s prior to t#e date of #earin!. 8#e court s#all liGewise causea cop" of t#e notice to be sent, b" re!istered ail or ot#erwise, at t#e e:pense of t#epetitioner, to ever" person naed t#erein w#ose address is Gnown, at least t#irt"da"s prior to t#e date of #earin!. Said notice s#all state, aon! ot#er t#in!s, t#enuber of t#e lost or destro"ed certificate of title, if Gnown, t#e nae of t#ere!istered owner, t#e naes of t#e occupants or persons in possession of t#epropert", t#e owners of t#e adKoinin! properties and all ot#er interested parties, t#elocation, area and boundaries of t#e propert", and t#e date on w#ic# all persons#avin! an" interest t#erein ust appear and file t#eir clai or obKections to t#epetition. 8#e petitioner s#all, at t#e #earin!, subit proof of t#e publication, postin!and service of t#e notice as directed b" t#e court.

arlier, Ee #ad $uoted in full t#e Aended Petition for reconstitution. As to t#e ori!inal petition, t#eori!inal records and t#e Record on Appeal do not contain nor include said ori!inal petition. Ee #avealso reproduced in full t#e *otice of earin! of t#e ori!inal petition as publis#ed in t#e %fficial)aette, ol. 66, *o. >1, pp. '++6( '++', Au!. >, 1&'0D and ol. 66, *o. >+, p. '4&>, Au!. 10, 1&'0as well as t#e *otice of earin! of t#e aended petition publis#ed in t#e %fficial )aette, ol. 6',*os. 5 and 6, wit# date of issue of eb. 1, 1&'1 and eb. ?, 1&'1, respectivel", purposel" to c#ecGand verif" w#et#er t#e strict and andator" re$uireents of t#e law #ave been coplied wit# b" t#epetitioner, now t#e respondent -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal. ;t is %ur findin! t#at in t#e *oticeof earin! of t#e ori!inal petition t#e followin! were listed to be notified b" re!istered ail, nael"7%lipia . Sta. aria, 8#e -irector of ands 8#e and Re!istration Coissioner, 8#e Re!ister of-eeds of Rial 8#e Provincial iscal of Rial, and 8#e %ffice of t#e Solicitor )eneral. Accordin! tot#e *otice, copies were re$uired to be posted in t#e bulletin board of t#e Provincial Capitol of Rial,

t#e unicipal uildin! of untinlupa, Rial, and on ots 1 and >.

;n t#e *otice of earin! of t#e aended petition, copies of t#e *otice were re$uired to be postedonl" in t#e bulletin board of t#e Provincial Capitol of Rial and on ots ; and >. 8#e *otice now oitst#e unicipal uildin! of untinlupa, Rial w#ic# t#e Court order of -eceber ', 1&'0 #adspecificall" directed. iGewise, in said *otice of earin! of t#e Aended Petition, no person wasnaed to w#o copies of t#e *otice s#ould be sent b" re!istered ail so t#at t#e naes ofanuela A$uial %lipia . Sta. aria, t#e -irector of ands, t#e and Re!istration Coissioner,t#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial, t#e Provincial iscal of Rial, and t#e %ffice of t#e Solicitor )eneralwere now oitted, w#ereas t#e order of t#e Court re$uired notices to t#e alle!ed boundar" owners,nael"7 anuela A$uial %lipia . Sta. aria, -irector of ands, -irector of orestr", Att". CasianoP. a$ui#on, and Att". 3osefina *epouceno.

Ee also find t#at t#e Aended Petition does not state or contain t#e nature and description of t#ebuildin!s or iproveents on t#e land not belon!in! to -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal. ;t alsodoes not state or contain t#e naes and addresses of t#e owners of suc# buildin!s oriproveents. 8#e naes and addresses of t#e occupants or persons in possession of t#e propert"and t#e naes and addresses of t#e owners of t#e adKoinin! properties are not also stated in t#epetition.


42/52

And since t#e above date do not appear in t#e Aended Petition, t#e sae data does not alsoappear in t#e *otice of earin! of t#e petition publis#ed in t#e %fficial )aette. Patentl", t#eprovisions of Section 1+ w#ic# enuerates andatoril" t#e contents of t#e Petition forReconstitution and Section 1> w#ic# siilarl" re$uire t#e contents of t#e *otice #ave not beencoplied wit#. ;n view of t#ese ultiple oissions w#ic# constitute non(copliance wit# t#e above(cited sections of t#e Act, Ee rule t#at said defects #ave not invested t#e Court wit# t#e aut#orit" or

Kurisdiction to proceed wit# t#e case because t#e anner or ode of obtainin! Kurisdiction asprescribed b" t#e statute w#ic# is andator" #as not been strictl" followed, t#ereb" renderin! allproceedin!s utterl" nun and void. Ee #old t#at t#e ere *otice t#at all interested parties are #ereb"cited to appear and s#ow cause if an" t#e" #ave w#" said petition s#ould not be !ranted is notsufficient for t#e law ust be interpreted strictl"D it ust be applied ri!orousl", wit# e:actness andprecision. Ee a!ree wit# t#e rulin! of t#e trial court !rantin! t#e otion to aend t#e ori!inal petitionprovided all t#e re$uisites for publication and postin! of notices be coplied wit#, it appearin! t#att#e aendent is $uite substantial in nature. As Ee #ave pointed above, respondent -eetria Sta.aria da. de ernal failed to copl" wit# all t#e re$uireents for publication and postin! of notices,w#ic# failure is fatal to t#e Kurisdiction of t#e Court.

8#e rule on notification to t#e possessor or one #avin! interest in t#e propert" w#ose title is sou!#tto be reconstituted is laid down e:plicitl" in Manila Railroad Co#pan! s. $on. Jose M Mo!a et al.,(1'&1>, 3une ++, 1&65, 14 SCRA >5?, t#us7

E#ere a petition for reconstitution would #ave t#e certificates of title reconstitutedfro t#e plans and tec#nical descriptions of t#e lots involved, w#ic# sources a" fallproperl" under section > . of t#esaid Act.

;f no notice of t#e date of #earin! of a reconstitution case is served on a possessor orone #avin! interest in t#e propert" involved, #e is deprived of #is da" in court and t#eorder of reconstitution is null and void, even if ot#erwise t#e said order s#ould #ave

been final and e:ecutor".

@nder Section 1> of Republic Act *o. +6, notice b" publication is not sufficient butsuc# notice ust be actuall" sent or delivered to parties affected b" t#e petition forreconstitution.

;n t#e instant case, t#e c#an!e in t#e nuber of t#e certificate of title sou!#t to be reconstituted fro8(1+/'& to 8C8 *o. 4+44& rendered at once t#e aut#enticit" or !enuineness of respondent9scertificate of title under suspicion or cloud of doubt. And since respondent alle!es t#at t#e tec#nicaldescriptions under bot# certificates of title are ;dentical and t#e sae, w#ic# t#e trial court also findsand affirs in its -ecision


43/52

possession, and valuable interests in t#e propert", w#ic# are not onl" nuerous but also patentl"conspicuous t#at private respondent cannot fei!n i!norance, uc# less unawareness, nor blindnessas to t#eir e:istence on #er or wit#in #er claied propert".

or t#e reasons stated in %ur Resolution of Septeber +5, 1&'&, Ee #ad directed t#e relocation oft#e respective boundaries of t#e propert" claied b" t#e intervenors and t#e private respondent due

notice to said parties and in t#eir presence or t#at of t#eir dul" aut#oried representatives. Eere$uired t#e C#ief of t#e surve" -ivision of t#e ureau of ands or #is dul" aut#oried representativeto conduct said relocation surve" and subit to t#is Court t#e results of suc# relocation surve",indicatin! t#erein suc# overlappin! as #e a" #ave found and deterined and t#e location of suc#industries, factories, ware#ouses, plants and ot#er coercial infrastructures, residential buildin!sand ot#er constructions, public or private roads, and ot#er landarGs found wit#in t#e areasconcerned.

;n copliance wit# said Resolution, a inal Report was subitted dated ebruar" +0, 1&?0 b"Aante R. -ua! %fficer ;n(C#ar!e, *CR ureau of ands, inforin! t#e Court t#at after all t#eparties on %ctober 1'. 1&91& and aGin! preparations for t#e surve" b" researc#, coputation andprocureent of e$uipent, t#e actual surve" started on %ctober +4, 1&'& and was finis#ed on

-eceber +4, 1&'& in accordance wit# e:istin! rules and re!ulations of t#e P#ilippine andSurve"ors anual. 8#e surve" was tied to a reference point of Gnown !eo!rap#ic position. Solarobservation was observed to !et t#e true direction of t#e tertiar" traverse stations w#ic# control t#edifferent properties affected b" ot ; and >, 114>'4. Present durin! t#e surve" were Att". Re"naldo, 8ato" of Alaban! -evelopent Corporation and Att". -ennis . An!eles counsel of )reenfield-evelopent Corporation. *o representative of private respondent -eetria Sta. aria da. deernal attended t#e surve", instead, #er counsel infored -irector -ua! in #is letter of %ctober1?, 1&'& t#at t#e" were not interested to attend said surve" and #ence ade no deposit as t#eirs#are in t#e surve" costs.

;t appears fro t#e inal Report t#at t#e relocation(verification surve" of t#e properties of Alaban!-evelopent Corporation was undertaGen b" a surve" part" #eaded b" n!r. Anacleto illones,C#ief, 8ec#nical Services Section, *CR, ureau of ands, siultaneousl" wit# t#e relocation(

verification surve" of t#e properties of )reenfield -evelopent Corporation conducted b" t#e surve"part" #eaded b" enr" ). riones, Sr., )eodetic n!ineer, *CR, ureau of ands, particularl" ot +,Pcs 1+61?D ot 1(- 0+>1D ot 1(C, 0+>1D ot 1 &?(+(-, of Plan ; ; (4>'4 claied b" respondent -eetriaSta. aria da. de ernal was also undertaGen b" t#e surve" tea #eaded b" n!r. illones. 8#eresult of t#e surve" s#ows t#at t#e parcels of land described in t#e tec#nical descriptions of ots 1

and >, 114>'4 could not be located in t#e localit" b" all tec#nical eans.


44/52

Attac#ed to t#e inal Report are t#e surve" reports of t#e surve" teas dated -eceber +?, 1&'&and 3anuar" +, 1&?0 arGed Anne:es and C and w#ite print copies of verification surve" plan5(04(00015> &?((+(A(+(A, Psd(55&4+, ot >&?(, Psd(4&?64, ot + 1, ot 1(C 0+>1, ot 1 ,t#e boundaries of w#ic# are in red line and Ee can see wit# t#e naGed e"e t#at t#eir boundariesencroac# and occup" bi! portions of t#e properties of Alaban! -evelopent Corporation w#oseboundaries are indicated in #eav" purple lines and also properties of )reenfield -evelopentCorporation w#ic# were transfers fro intervenor Raon -. a!atsin!.

%n t#e verification surve" plan 5(04(00015>, Ee can see t#at ot 1, 11(4>'4 covers and overlaps

an" lots of untinlupa state liGe ots ?1, ?+, ?>, ?4, ?6, ??, ?&, ?', 4+, 1>0?-, 1>0?(&, 1>0?(,44(C, t#e anila Sout# Super#i!#wa" portion, ot + 0, a s#oppin! center, t#e C%P C8, ASPC ;*-. and ot#ers.

ot >, ;;(4>'4, on t#e sae verification plan can be seen to cover and overlap aon! ot#ers ot 1(-1+>0 , 1+4, and inside are t#e residence of Raona!atsin!, C#eical -isp., ;nc., 8#e ;deal Condoiniu, -on 3esus lvd., an asp#alt road andportions of t#e anila Sout# Super i!#wa". Aon! t#e boundar" owners are ;!nacio . iwa!, t#euntinlupa state, and Alaban! -ev. Corp.

8#e above visible findin!s on 5(04(00015> confir t#e contents of Anne:es A, A(1, A(+ listin!t#e properties of t#e untinlupa state t#at are encroac#ed b" ots ; and >, Plan ;;(4>'4 found and

attac#ed in t#e Repl" rief of petitioner, pp. +?(>4 w#erein soe 5' lots were listed as covered b"ot 1, ;;(4>'4 and soe 10' lots covered b" ot >, ;;(4>'4, prepared b" Anacleto S. illones, C#ief,8ec#nical Services Section, ureau of ands, Re!ional %ffice *o. ;, etro anila.

Ee accept and approve t#is inal Report on t#e relocation verification surve" ordered b" @s on t#eproperties in $uestion, furt#er adittin! t#e sae as evidence of t#is Court. Private respondent was!iven all t#e opportunit" to attend and participate in said surve" and inspite of due notice to #er oft#e tie and place of t#e surve", s#e anifested no interest in t#e sae. %n t#e contrar", s#epreferred to stand pat on t#e certification of t#e and Re!istration Coissioner t#at t#ere was noconflict of t#e boundaries as platted and besides s#e #as no financial eans to defra" #er s#are oft#e surve" cost. Ee reKect t#ese obKections of private respondent as wit#out erit.

;t is too late in t#e da" for private respondent to coplain t#at t#e surve" report is not properevidence for not #avin! been presented at t#e trial of t#e case nor passed upon b" t#e said Courtand t#e Court of Appeals. Private respondent #as waived #er ri!#t to obKect to said report b" refusin!to attend and participate in t#e relocation and verification surve". S#e is now estopped to clai t#att#e" were not furnis#ed copies of t#e report after t#e Court directed t#e parties to secure copies oft#e sae at t#eir e:pense. S#e is liGewise estopped to clai t#at s#e is not bound b" t#e results ofsaid report. 8#e inal Report is evidence obtained b" t#e Supree Court upon its own aut#orit"in#erent in t#e e:ercise of its Kudicial function and power to ferret and establis# t#e trut# upon due


45/52

notice to t#e liti!ants and to be present b" person, representative or counsel in t#e conduct of t#erelocation(verification surve".

8#at private respondent is not financiall" able to s#are in t#e e:penses of t#e surve" costs is puerileif not s#a and flis", considerin! t#at as t#e records s#ow s#e #ad disposed a lar!e portion of t#eliti!ated propert" to certain parties for P+00,000.00 on Au!ust +5, 1&'> and t#ereafter s#e ceded

40O of t#e area for developent to a developer corporation for Pl.000,000.00 on Au!ust +5, 1&'>and anot#er portion for P+00,000.00 to t#e sae corporation also on Au!ust +5, 1&'>. oreover,since t#e total area of t#e two lots, ots ; and >, is ver" e:tensive coprisin! around 14> #ectares,ore or less, t#e surve" cost is fair and reasonable and private respondent9s s#are of t#e sae is

Kust and e$uitable. And ore iportantl", suc# verification relocation surve" would redound to #erbenefit if #er clai is actuall" correct and true.

esides, private respondent9s reliance on t#e report of t#e Coissioner of and Re!istration. 8#e ere ;dentification of :#ibit R b" a

subordinate eplo"ee of t#e and Re!istration Coission, Ricardo Arandilla erel" aut#enticatedt#e !enuineness of t#e si!nature of Coissioner ilo! but not t#e correctness and trut# of itscontents. 8#e report was ade e% parte,even wit#out t#e order of t#e Court nor wit# notice andattendance of t#e oppositors.

urt#erore, under Section +4 of Republic Act +6, t#e C#ief of t#e )eneral and Re!istration %ffice,now t#e and Re!istration Coissioner, is re$uired to issue rules, re!ulations, circulars andinstructions, and prescribe suc# booGs and blanG fors as a" be necessar" to carr" into effect t#eprovisions of t#e Act. 8#e rules and re!ulations proul!ated pursuant to Sec. +4, R.A. +6 e:plicitl"provide t#at t#e petition for reconstitution of a transfer certificate of title s#all also be accopaniedb" an" of t#e followin! docuents, as a source of reconstitution, and suc# ot#er docuents as a"constitute evidence in support of said petition7


46/52

Ee #ave noted t#e conflictin! evidence presented in t#e records to prove or disprove t#e alle!edaut#enticit" of 8C8 *o. 4+44&, t#e inconsistent testionies of !overnent officials testif"in! for t#eprivate respondent or for t#e oppositor -irector of ands, includin! contradictor" docuentspresented to support t#e respective positions of t#e parties t#erein. 8#ese conflicts andinconsistencies a" be ascribed to t#e failin!s of #uan eor", tr"in! to recall events t#atoccurred an", an" "ears past or to t#e c#an!in! practice and procedure b" !overnent officials

t#eselves includin! eplo"ees in t#e offices of t#e Re!ister of -eeds of anila and Rial. venreports certified b" #andwritin! e:perts of t#e *; are rendered of doubtful inte!rit" in t#e li!#t oft#eir own adissions t#at for!ers possess better sGills t#an t#e !enuine writers t#eselves.ecause of t#e lon! passa!e of tie and t#e frailt" of #uan recollections, uc# of t#e evidence onrecord are difficult to confir and verif". ortunatel", #owever, t#ere is t#e data of tec#nicaldescriptions of t#e lots indicated in t#e surve" plan w#ic# are constant and unc#an!in!. 8#esetec#nical descriptions are t#e fundaental basis or readin!s of land surve"s indicated b"lon!itudinal and latitude bearin!s in relation to solar positions. 8#e" are, t#erefore, peranent andfi:ed and t#e" can be and are verifiable b" scientific and precision instruents usin! and appl"in!t#e principles of !eoetr" and tri!onoetr".

@pon t#e fore!oin! preises, Ee la" down t#e followin! findin!s and conclusions7

1. ;n t#e ori!inal petition for reconstitution, t#e 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle sou!#t to be reconstitutedb" private respondent was 8(1+/'&. @pon a report of t#e Re!ister of -eeds of Rial t#at said title isnot filed in Re!istr" ooG 8('&D t#at Certificate of 8itle *o. 1+ is under Re!istration ooG *o. 8(1issued in t#e nae of dwin Earnes and t#at said title refers to a propert" situated in Pasa" Cit"Dt#at 8C8 1+ was alread" cancelled b" 8C8 *o. 1&, ooG 11 of t#e Re!istr" of -eeds of Rial, privaterespondent alle!in! istaGe and fraud coitted b" #er coon(law #usband An!el Cru,aended #er petition, c#an!in! t#e nuber of #er title fro 8(1+/'& to 8C8 4+44& but wit# t#e saetec#nical description. Ee $uote a portion of t#e trial court9s decision in t#is re!ard, t#us7

A coparison of t#e tec#nical descriptions appearin! in t#e ori!inal title *o. 1+/9;9('&and 8ransfer Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+44& s#ows t#at t#e parcels of land described inbot# titles are e:actl" t#e sae. '4 is faGe, because it pertains to Plan 11(4005, t#e landbein! t#e propert" of t#e unicipalit" of iloan ;sland of Pandan, Province of e"te,containin! an area of >?>? s$uare eters, surve"ed on -eceber 1&, 1&10 and


47/52

approved on ebruar" ', 1&11D %bviousl", Plan 11(4>'4 is also a faGeD 09. Surve"ed 3an. &(+&, 1&11.

ro t#is caption alone, it is clear t#at t#e surve" was ade not for t#e purpose of ac$uirin! t#eproperties b" sales patent fro t#e )overnent durin! t#e 3apanese %ccupation or in 1&4>. ;f saidparcels of land were surve"ed and approved on 3ul" +5, 1&11, a a:iu area of 16 #ectares could#ave been le!all" ac$uired b" sales patent onl", pursuant to t#e P#ilippines ill of 1&0+. 8#e sae

a:iu area of 16 #ectares was allowed until 1&1& w#en t#e a:iu area of ac$uisition b"sales patent was increased to 100 #ectares under Act +?'4, and upon t#e adoption of t#e 1&>5Constitution, it was furt#er increased to 144 #ectares. Iet, t#e surve" conducted and approved on3ul" +5, 1&11 for %lipia . Sta. aria, predecessor in interest of private respondent #erein, s#owst#at t#e propert" surve"ed coprises an area of 1,?66,&'& s$uare eters, or 1?6.6& #ectares, oreor less. 8#is surve", if undertaGen for purposes of sales application, would not and could not #avebeen approved b" t#e -irector of ands because it is clearl" a!ainst t#e law.


48/52

@nder t#e Public and Act 1 "ears t#ereafter.

5. 8#e properties of t#e intervenors are s#own to #ave been derived fro %ri!inal Certificate of 8itle*o. 6?4, ori!inall" re!istered Septeber +0, 1&1> in t#e Re!istration ooG, Re!ister of -eeds ofRial, ol. A(', pa!e ?4 and issued pursuant to -ecree *o. 455+ issued Au!ust +', 1&10 in t#enae of t#e )overnent of t#e P#ilippine ;slands, w#ic# title covers and ebraces t#e landot#erwise Gnown as t#e untinlupa state. 8#e seven 6 purc#asers for value in t#e Alaban! ills Subdivision.

8#e series of transfers fro t#e ori!inal certificate of title *o. 6?4 in t#e nae of t#e )overnent oft#e P#il. ;slands !ave rise to t#e transfer certificates of title issued b" t#e Re!ister of -eeds upon t#ere!istration of t#e transfer deeds after surve"s of t#e subdivision lots or portions of t#e ori!inal areawere undertaGen and approved b" t#e Court. 8#e tec#nical descriptions indicated in t#e surve"s andappearin! on t#e face of t#e titles t#eselves #ave been dul" relocated and verified in t#erelocation(verification surve" w#ic# Ee #ad ordered. 8#e inal Report subitted to t#e Courtconcluded t#at t#e properties of t#e ;ntervenors )reenfield -evelopent Corp., Alaban!-evelopent Corp., and Raon -. a!atsin! were relocated and verified correct, but t#at ots 1and > of Plan 11(4>'4 claied b" private respondent -eetria Sta. aria da. de ernal cannot belocated on t#e !round b" all tec#nical eans.

8#e 8orrens 8itles of t#e ;ntervenors )reenfield -evelopent Corp., Alaban! -evelopent Corp.,and Raon -. a!atsin! w#ic# are derived fro Certificate of 8itle *o. 6?4 issued in Septeber +0,1&1> clearl" antedate t#at of t#e private respondent w#o can trace #er title onl" to an alle!ed salespatent awarded to #er ot#er on Septeber 15, 1&4+ and to %ri!inal Certificate of 8itle *o. 4+>&+issued Septeber +&, 1&4+ pursuant to said sales patent. @nder t#ese facts, t#e applicable and!overnin! rule or doctrine w#ic# is well(establis#ed in t#is Kurisdiction is t#at w#en two certificates oftitle are issued to different persons coverin! t#e sae land in w#ole or in part, t#e earlier in dateust prevail as between t#e ori!inal parties, and in case of successive re!istration w#ere ore t#anone certificate is issued over t#e land, t#e person #oldin! under prior certificate is entitled to t#e landas a!ainst t#e person w#o relies on t#e second certificate. 1 P#il. 5&0D -e illa vs. 8rinidad, ).R. *o. (+4&1?,arc# +0, 1&6?, ++ SCRA 116', 11'4. See also od!es vs. -" uncio ).R. *o. (160&6, %ct. >0,1&6+, 6 SCRA +?'D Re!ister of -eeds vs( P*, (1'641, 3an. >0, 1&65, 1> SCRA 46D Alate vs.P*, (+006?, 3an. +6, 1&6', +0 SCRA 4++=.

8#e efficac" and inte!rit" of t#e 8orrens S"ste ust be protected and preserved to ensure t#estabilit" and securit" of land titles for ot#erwise land owners#ip in t#e countr" would be renderederratic and restless and can certainl" be a potent and veritable cause of social unrest and a!rariana!itation. 8#e courts ust e:ercise caution and vi!ilance in order to !uard t#e indefeasibilit" andiprescriptibilit" of t#e 8orrens Re!istration S"ste a!ainst spurious clais and for!ed docuents


49/52


50/52

occupanc" and iproveents ade b" t#e applicant, t#en prepare and si!n t#e sales patent, on t#e!round t#at no sales patent was issued b" reason, aon! ot#ers, t#at t#e area sold was in e:cessand be"ond t#at allowed b" law, t#e lacG of t#e sales patent nuber and t#e apparent irre!ularitiesappearin! on t#e surve" plan, t#e ori!inal of w#ic# is not subsistin! in t#e files and records of t#eureau of ands, it becoes t#e copellin! dut" of private respondent to prove t#at said salespatent was propert" approved and issued and t#ereafter recorded in t#e office of t#e re!ister of

deeds, t#e officer re$uired b" law to issue t#e ori!inal certificate of title to t#e patentee, %lipia .Sta. aria, private respondent9s ot#er, w#o alle!edl" transferred t#e propert" to #er dau!#ter,private respondent #erein, b" virtue of an alle!ed deed of sale e:ecuted between t#e in *oveber,1&4>.

@nder t#e and Re!istration Act, w#en t#e land is transferred b" t#e re!istered owner b" reason ofsale or ot#erwise, t#e deed of sale ust be recorded and re!istered in t#e %ffice of t#e Re!ister of-eeds. ;t ust be assued t#en t#at suc# deed of sale referred to above was dul" recorded andre!istered in t#e %ffice of t#e Re!ister of -eeds for 8C8 *o. 4+44& was issued in t#e nae of t#etransferee, private respondent #erein. Alt#ou!# t#e latter clais t#at #er cop" of t#e deed of salewas burned durin! t#e fire in Pasi! durin! t#e occupation, s#e could #ave obtained a cop" t#ereoffro t#e Re!ister of -eeds w#ere t#e ori!inal was re!istered but s#e did not and t#ere is nos#owin! w#" s#e failed to do so and present t#e sae in court to corroborate and support t#eaut#enticit" of #er title, 8C8 *o. 4+44&, and t#e re!ularit" of t#e transfer fro %C8 *o. 4+>&+.

8#e failure of t#e private respondent to obtain and present in evidence an" docuent or prove an"act, deed, fact or circustance supportin! and corroboratin! t#e issuance of t#e sales patent to #erot#er, %lipia . Sta. aria, as well as an" proof to support and corroborate t#e e:ecution andre!istration of t#e deed of sale in favor of private respondent wit# no satisfactor" e:planation of suc#failure ipel @s to aGe t#e conclusion t#at no sales patent was dul" and re!ularl" issued b" t#e!overnent coverin! t#e propert" in $uestion to #er ot#er. Ee #old t#at t#e sales patent claiedb" private respondent as t#e source of 8C8 *o. 4+44& is non(e:istent, fictitious and ia!inar". 8#eere notation in 8C8 *o. 4+44& t

Date post:	01-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	marilou-garal
View:	221 times
Download:	1 times

Dir. of Lands vs CA Gr L-45168

Documents