THIRD DIVISION G.R. No.

180427 September 30, 2013

CRISANTA GUIDO-ENRIQUE , Petitioner, vs. A!ICIA I. "ICTORINO, #EIRS O$ ANTONIA "DA. DE "ICTORINO, %&' #ON. RAND( A. RUTAQUIO, )& *)+ ,%p%,)t- %+ A,t)&. Re.)+ter o/ Dee'+ o/ R)0%1 $or 2oro&. 3r%&,*, Respondents. DECISION 4ERA!TA, J.: Before the Court is a petition for review on ertiorari under Ru!e "#$ of the Ru!es of Court see%in& to reverse and set aside the De ision' and Reso!ution,( dated Septe)*er +, (,,- and O to*er (#, (,,-, respe tive!., of the Court of /ppea!s 0C/$ in C/12.R. SP No. 3,#4". The fa tua! and pro edura! ante edents, as narrated *. the C/, are as fo!!ows5 In 6e*ruar. '73,, /ntonia Vda. De Vi torino 8/ntonia Vi torino9 fi!ed with the Court of 6irst Instan e 8C6I9 of Ri:a! an /pp!i ation for Re&istration of Tit!e over a ',,+,4 s;uare1)eter !ot, situated in Binan&onan, Ri:a! 0su*<e t !ot$. /ntonia Vi torino a!!e&ed that she is the owner in fee si)p!e of the su*<e t !ot whi h she and her !ate hus*and, 6e!i=*erto Vi torino, a ;uired thru pur hase. /ntonia Vi torino asserted that she and her prede essor1in1interest >have *een in open, ontinuous, e= !usive, notorious and adversed possession and o upation> of said !and. /ntonia Vi torino presented the Ta= De !aration over the said !ot issued under her !ate hus*and?s na)e. The Repu*!i , thru the Dire tor of @ands, opposed said app!i ation a!!e&in& that the su*<e t !ot *e!on&s to the Repu*!i of the Phi!ippines, thus, >not su*<e t to private appropriation.> Per Report, dated Au!. '-, '73', of the Division of Ori&ina! Re&istration 8of the Offi e of the / tin& Co))issioner of @and Re&istration9, it appeared that the su*<e t !ot is a portion of a !ar&e par e! of !and overed *. TCT No. B1(',(, re&istered under the na)e of /ntonia 2uido, et a!., and, at the sa)e ti)e, over!apped with another !ot whi h was a!so a su*<e t of an app!i ation for re&istration. The Report !i%ewise dis !osed that a ase for annu!)ent of TCT No. (44--, the )other tit!e of TCT No. B1(',(, 8was9 fi!ed *. the Repu*!i a&ainst 82uido, et. a!., and9 was pendin& *efore the C6I, Bran h C, Pasi&, Betro Bani!a, do %eted as Civi! Case No. 4"("( 02uido Case$. On Septe)*er '3, '73-, the Nationa! @and Tit!es and Deeds Re&istration /d)inistration 0/d)inistration$ su*)itted a Se ond Report a!!e&in& that a De ision was rendered in the 2uido Case in favor of 82uido, et. a!.,9 whi h was appea!ed *. the Repu*!i . The /d)inistration pra.ed that the de ision in /ntonia Vi torino?s app!i ation for re&istration >*e he!d in a*e.an e unti! after Transfer Certifi ate of Tit!e No. (44-- and a!! derivative tit!es have *een an e!ed *. the Court, the dis repan . has *een orre ted and the !earan es re;uire)ents are o)p!ied with.> However, so)eti)e in Aune '733, the Chief of the Surve.s Division of the 8Offi e of the9 Re&iona! Te hni a! Dire tor 8of the @ands Bana&e)ent Se tor, Re&ion IV9 infor)ed the /d)inistration that the > oordinates> used *. the /d)inistration were a tua!!. erroneous and, per onfir)ation *. the Re&iona! Dire tor, the !ot su*<e t of /ntonia Vi torino?s app!i ation does not over!ap with an. other par e! of !and. On /u&ust '', '733, the RTC1Pasi& pro eeded with the ase and su*)itted the sa)e for reso!ution.

On /u&ust '#, '733, the RTC1Pasi& issued a De ision &rantin& /ntonia Vi torino?s /pp!i ation. The RTC1 Pasi& found that the su*<e t !ot >is not within an. forest reservation nor )ort&a&ed or en u)*ered in favor of an. person or !endin& institution.> The dispositive portion of said De ision reads5 DHERE6ORE, affir)in& the order of &enera! defau!t, de ision is here*. rendered onfir)in& the tit!e of the app!i ant to the par e! of !and overed *. p!an PSE1,"1,,,#7,, onsistin& of ',,+,4 s;. ). and orderin& the re&istration thereof in her na)e as fo!!ows5 /NTONI/ VD/. DE VICTORINO, of !e&a! a&e, widow, 6i!ipino, residin& at Ba!inao, Pasi&, Betro Bani!a. ==== SO ORDERED. On Nove)*er 4, '733, the RTC1Pasi& issued an Order for the Issuan e of the De ree dire tin& the Co))issioner of the @and Re&istration Co))ission to i)p!e)ent the said De ision, onsiderin& the sa)e has *e o)e fina!. However, pendin& the reso!ution of the 2uido Case, the @and Re&istration /uthorit. he!d in a*e.an e the issuan e of the de ree in favor of /ntonia Vi torino. Beanwhi!e, on Nove)*er (', '77', the Supre)e Court issued a De ision 0Repu*!i v. Court of /ppea!s, 2.R. No. 3"7++, Nove)*er (','77', (," SCR/ '+,$ in the 2uido Case in favor of 0/ntonia 2uido, et.a!.$ and de !ared TCT (44-- issued under the na)e of 2uido, et. a!. true and authenti . The Supre)e Court, however, too% <udi ia! noti e of the fa t that prior to the re onstitution of TCT (44-- in favor of 0/ntonia 2uido, et. a!.$, > ertain portions of the area were in possession of o upants who su essfu!!. o*tained ertifi ates of tit!e over the area o upied *. the) F and a!so of o upants who had not o*tained ertifi ates of tit!e over the area possessed *. the) *ut the !en&ths of their possession were !on& enou&h to a)ount to ownership, had the !and *een in fa t unre&istered.> The Hi&h Court, thus, ru!ed that >a!thou&h pres ription is unavai!in& a&ainst 0/ntonina 2uido, et. a!.$ *e ause the. are ho!ders of a va!id ertifi ate of tit!e, the e;uita*!e presu)ption of !a hes )a. *e app!ied a&ainst the) for fai!ure to assert their ownership for su h an unreasona*!e !en&th of ti)e.> The dispositive portion of said De ision reads5 /CCORDIN2@G, the de ision of the Court of /ppea!s in C/12.R. No. '(744 is /66IRBED su*<e t to the herein de !ared superior ri&hts of *ona fide o upants with re&istered tit!es within the area overed *. ;uestioned de ree and *ona fide o upants therein with !en&th of possession whi h had ripened to ownership, the !atter to *e deter)ined in an appropriate pro eedin&. SO ORDERED. On Ba. (', (,,', Private Respondent /!i ia Vi torino fi!ed a Banifestation and Botion for an /!ias Order for Issuan e of a De ree in the Na)e of the New Owner1Transferee. Private Respondent a!!e&ed that /ntonia Vi torino so!d the su*<e t !ot in her favor on /u&ust ', '77#.Private Respondent !i%ewise notified the RTC1Pasi& of /ntonia Vi torino?s death on De e)*er -, '77#. Private Respondent pra.ed that, onsiderin& the de ision of the Supre)e Court, dated Nove)*er (', '77', ad<udi atin& the su*<e t !ot in favor of its !awfu! o upants, and the De ision of the RTC1Pasi&, dated /u&ust '#, '733, &rantin& /ntonia?s app!i ation for re&istration over said !ot, the RTC1Pasi& shou!d issue an order annotatin& these de isions of the Supre)e Court and the RTC1Pasi& in TCT B1(',( to se&re&ate /ntonia?s portion. Private Respondent a!so pra.ed that an /!ias Order for the Issuan e of de ree of re&istration *e issued in her favor as the su*<e t !ot?s new ownerHtransferee.

On /u&ust 3, (,,(, the @and Re&istration /uthorit. 0@R/$ )anifested that the su*<e t !ot was >dee)ed e= !uded fro) TCT No. (44-- of the 2uidos.> The @R/ a!!e&ed that it was i)perative that a )e)orandu) of the ourt?s de ision ad<udi atin& ownership of the su*<e t !ot to /ntonia Vi torino *e annotated in TCT B1(',( to ena*!e the @R/ to o)p!. with the issuan e of the de ree. On Nove)*er '7, (,,(, the RTC1Pasi& issued the 'st assai!ed Order &rantin& Private Respondent?s Botion and dire tin& the @and Re&istration /uthorit. to issue the orrespondin& de ree >in a ordan e with the ad<udi ation of 0the Tria! Court?s$ De ision dated /u&ust '#,'733 after pa.)ent of a!! ta=es due on the !and.> The RTC1Pasi& !i%ewise ordered the Re&ister of Deeds of Ri:a!, Boron& Bran h, to annotate on TCT B1(',( the fo!!owin& )e)orandu)5 B. virtue of the de ision of the Court dated /u&ust'#, '733 in @and Re&. Case No. N1',4-', @RC Re ord No. N1##'47, /ntonia Vda. De Vi torino, app!i ant, p!an Psu1,"1,,,#7,, has *een ad<udi ated in favor of app!i ant and pursuant to the de ision of the Supre)e Court in 2.R. No.3"7++, pro)u!&ated on Nove)*er (', '77', entit!ed Repu*!i of the Phi!ippines vs. The Court of /ppea!s and /ntonina 2uido, et. a!. 0(," SCR/ '+,$, afore1said !ots are e= !uded fro) this ertifi ate of tit!e. On De e)*er ", (,,(, Petitioner Crisanta 2uido1Enri;ue: fi!ed a Botion for C!arifi ation ar&uin& that the Nove)*er '7, (,,( Order varies the ter)s of the /u&ust '#, '733 De ision of the RTC1Pasi&. The /u&ust'#, '733 De ision did not order the se&re&ation of the su*<e t !ot fro) the !ot overed *. TCT B1 (',(, hen e, the assai!ed De ision of Nove)*er '7, (,,( orderin& said se&re&ation effe tive!. )odified the previous de ision. Petitioner sou&ht to !arif. whether the /u&ust '#, '733De ision ordered the se&re&ation of the su*<e t !ot and whether the @and Re&istration /uthorit. has the authorit. to )ove for said se&re&ation. On Bar h +, (,,4, in its (nd assai!ed Order, the RTC1Pasi& denied Petitioner?s Botion for *ein& )oot and ordered the issuan e of the de ree in the na)e of /ntonia Vda. De Vi torino. Conse;uent!., on even date, an /!ias Order for the Issuan e of the De ree whi h is the su*<e t of the 4rd assai!ed Order was issued. Petitioner?s Botion for Re onsideration thereof was denied *. the RTC1Pasi& in the "th assai!ed Order dated Septe)*er (, (,,4.4 /&&rieved, herein petitioner fi!ed a spe ia! ivi! a tion for ertiorari with the C/. On Septe)*er +, (,,-, the C/ pro)u!&ated its assai!ed De ision, the dispositive portion of whi h reads as fo!!ows5 DHERE6ORE, the instant Petition for Certiorari is DENIED. The assai!ed Order, dated Bar h +, (,,4, and Order, dated Septe)*er (, (,,4,of the Re&iona! Tria! Court of Pasi& Cit., Bran h '#+, in @and Re&. Case No. N1',4-', are here*. /66IRBED. / ordin&!., the Order, dated Nove)*er '7, (,,(, of the Re&iona! Tria! Court of Pasi& Cit., Bran h '#+, in @and Re&. Case No. N1',4-', is here*. /66IRBED with BODI6IC/TION in that Private Respondent?s Banifestation and Botion for /n /!ias Order of a De ree in the Na)e of the New OwnerHTransferee, dated Ba. '3, (,,', is 2R/NTED IN P/RT. The pra.er for the issuan e of a De ree in Private Respondent?s na)e is DENIED. /!! other dispositions therein are here*. /66IRBED in toto. SO ORDERED." The C/ he!d that5

The Honora*!e Supre)e Court a %now!ed&ed the ri&ht of the *onafide o upant of a portion of the !ot under TCT No. B1(',( and, in a!!owin& said *ona fide o upants to retain the portion of 2uido?s !ot the. are in possession of, the Supre)e Court effe tive!. se&re&ated, a!*eit onstru tive!., and reserved said o upied portions for the *enefit of the o upants. The Supre)e Court de !ared that the 2uidos, et a!. waived their ri&ht over the propert. in favor of >those who possessed ertain spe ifi portions for su h !en&ths of ti)e as to a)ount to fu!! ownership.> /ntonia Vi torino, thru her prede essor1in1interest, was found to have possessed a ertain spe ifi portion, PSE1,"1,,,#7,, &oin& as far *a % as '744. The RTC1Pasi& de reed /ntonia Vi torino to *e a !awfu! o upant of the su*<e t !ot. Hen e as a !awfu! or *ona fide o upant of a portion of a par e! of !and overed *. TCT No. B1(',( of the 2uidos, the annotation in TCT No. B1(',( and se&re&ation of the portion of the !ot &ranted in favor of /ntonia Vi torino is proper.
1wphi1

True, there was no ate&ori a! dire tive *. the RTC1Pasi& to se&re&ate the su*<e t !ot fro) the rest of the par e! of !and overed *. TCT No. B1(',' 0si $. However, De a&ree with Private Respondent that the se&re&ation of the su*<e t !ot was the resu!t of /ntonia Vi torino a ;uirin& tit!e over a portion of the said propert. of the 2uidos. The se&re&ation was the onse;uen e of the &rant of /ntonia Vi torino?s app!i ation for re&istration. = = = =# Herein petitioner fi!ed a Botion for Re onsideration, *ut the C/ denied it in its assai!ed Reso!ution dated O to*er (#, (,,-. Hen e, the instant petition with the fo!!owin& assi&n)ent of errors5

'. THE HONOR/B@E COERT O6 /PPE/@S COBBITTEDSERIOES /ND REVERSIB@E ERROR DHEN IT DISBISSED THEPETITION 6OR CERTIOR/RI /ND PROHIBITION IN C/12.R. SP NO. 3,#4" /ND, /T THE S/BE TIBE, /66IRBIN2 DITHBODI6IC/TION THE NOVEBBER '7, (,,( ORDER ISSEED BGTHE HONOR/B@E PRESIDIN2 AED2E O6 BR/NCH '#+ O6 THERE2ION/@ TRI/@ COERT O6 P/SI2 CITG TH/T DIRECTED THERE2ISTER O6 DEEDS 6OR RII/@, BORON2 BR/NCH, TO/NNOT/TE ON TR/NS6ER CERTI6IC/TE O6 TIT@E NO. B1(',( O6 THE RE2ISTRG O6 DEEDS 6OR RII/@, BORON2 BR/NCH, /BEBOR/NDEB DHICH, IN E66ECT, DEPRIVES PETITIONER /ND THE OTHER CO1ODNERS, DITHOET DEE PROCESS O6@/D, O6 ',,+,4 SJE/RE BETERS O6 THEIR @/ND. (. THE HONOR/B@E COERT O6 /PPE/@S COBBITTEDSERIOES /ND REVERSIB@E ERROR DHEN IT SEST/INED THEHONOR/B@E PRESIDIN2 AED2E O6 BR/NCH '#+ O6 THERE2ION/@ TRI/@ COERT O6 P/SI2 CITG IN HIS ISSE/NCE O6THE B/RCH +, (,,4 ORDER EPHO@DIN2 THE NOVEBBER '7, (,,( ORDERK THE B/RCH +, (,,4 /@I/S ORDER 6OR THE ISSE/NCE O6 THE DECREEK /ND, THE SEPTEBBER (, (,,4 ORDER, DHICH V/RIED THE TENOR O6 THE /E2EST '#, '733DECISION IN @/ND RE2. C/SE NO. N1',4-' /ND @RC C/SE NO. N1##'47, ENTIT@ED IN RE5 /PP@IC/TION 6OR RE2ISTR/TION O6@/ND TIT@E, /NTONI/ VD/. DE VICTORINO, /PP@IC/NT. 4. THE HONOR/B@E COERT O6 /PPE/@S COBBITTEDSERIOES /ND REVERSIB@E ERROR DHEN IT EPHE@D THE 6OER 0"$ ORDERS ISSEED BG THE HONOR/B@E PRESIDIN2 AED2E O6BR/NCH '#+ O6 THE RE2ION/@ TRI/@ COERT O6 P/SI2 CITG, NOTDITHST/NDIN2 THE 6/CT TH/T THESE ORDERS /@TERED, CH/N2ED, BODI6IED /ND DIBINISHED IN / PROCEEDIN2TH/T IS IBPROPER 6OR /@TERIN2, CH/N2IN2, BODI6GIN2/ND DIBINISHIN2 / CERTI6IC/TE O6 @/ND TIT@E.

". THE HONOR/B@E COERT O6 /PPE/@S COBBITTEDSERIOES /ND REVERSIB@E ERROR DHEN IT RE@ED TH/T THEPROCEEDIN2 TH/T D/S HE@D IN CONNECTION DITH @/NDRE2. C/SE NO. N1',4-' /ND @RC C/SE NO. N1##'47 , ENTIT@EDIN RE5 /PP@IC/TION 6OR RE2ISTR/TION O6 @/ND TIT@E,/NTONI/ VD/. DE VICTORINO, /PP@IC/NT, /ND RESE@TIN2 INTHE RENDITION O6 THE /E2EST '#, '733 DECISION RENDEREDBG BR/NCH '#+ O6 THE RE2ION/@ TRI/@ COERT O6 P/SI2CITG IS THE /PPROPRI/TE PROCEEDIN2 CONTEBP@/TED BGTHE HONOR/B@E COERT IN ITS NOVEBBER (', '77' DECISIONIN 2.R. NO. 3"7++ ENTIT@ED REPEB@IC O6 THE PHI@IPPINES VS.COERT O6 /PPE/@S. #. THE HONOR/B@E COERT O6 /PPE/@S COBBITTEDSERIOES /ND REVERSIB@E ERROR TH/T DEPRIVED THEPETITIONER O6 DEE PROCESS DHEN IT /@@ODED THEPRESIDIN2 AED2E DHO RENDERED THE /E2EST '#, '733 DECISION IN @/ND RE2. C/SE NO. N1',4-' /ND @RC C/SE NO. N1##'47 TO P/RTICIP/TE IN THE DECISION1B/LIN2 PROCESSTH/T RESE@TED IN / DECISION TH/T HE@D TH/T THEPROCEEDIN2 IN THE RE2ION/@ TRI/@ COERT IS THE/PPROPRI/TE PROCEEDIN2 ENVISIONED IN THE NOVEBBER (', '77' DECISION O6 THE HONOR/B@E COERT IN 2.R. NO. 3"7++ ENTIT@ED REPEB@IC O6 THE PHI@IPPINES VS. COERT O6/PPE/@S.+
The petition !a %s )erit. In her first assi&ned error, petitioner reiterates her ar&u)ent raised *efore the C/ that the /u&ust '#, '733 De ision of the RTC in @RC Case No. ',4-' is nu!! and void for !a % of <urisdi tion as we!! as for denia! of petitioner?s ri&ht to due pro ess. The Court is not persuaded. /s the C/ had orre t!. ru!ed, the assai!ed /u&ust '#, '733 De ision of the RTC had a!read. *e o)e fina! and e=e utor. and under the do trine of fina!it. of <ud&)ent or i))uta*i!it. of <ud&)ent, a de ision that has a ;uired fina!it. *e o)es i))uta*!e and una!tera*!e, and )a. no !on&er *e )odified in an. respe t, even if the )odifi ation is )eant to orre t erroneous on !usions of fa t and !aw, and whether it *e )ade *. the ourt that rendered it or *. the Hi&hest Court of the !and. - /n. a t whi h vio!ates this prin ip!e )ust i))ediate!. *e stru % down. 3 Dhi!e there are re o&ni:ed e= eptions to this do trine,7 petitioner fai!ed to prove that the instant ase is a)on& the). Boreover, as the C/ had o*served, petitioner did not raise an. issue re&ardin& the supposed nu!!it. of the su*<e t De ision of the RTC in her Botion for C!arifi ation ', fi!ed on De e)*er ", (,,(. It was on!. in her petition for ertiorari fi!ed with the C/ that petitioner posited the ar&u)ent that the said De ision is void. This Court is not, !i%ewise, persuaded *. petitioner?s ar&u)ent, in her se ond and third assi&n)ent of errors, that the assai!ed De ision and Orders of the RTC are in dero&ation of the esta*!ished !aws and prin ip!es on !and re&istration. Bore parti u!ar!., petitioner postu!ates that the RTC, a tin& as a !and re&istration ourt, had no <urisdi tion to entertain /ntonia Vi torino?s app!i ation for re&istration of tit!e *e ause the !ot su*<e t of app!i ation is entire!. within the *oundaries of a !ar&er tra t of !and whi h is a!read. overed *. Transfer Certifi ate of Tit!e 0TCT$ No. B1(',(. Petitioner ontends that TCT No. B1 (',( has *e o)e indefeasi*!e. This Court has a!read. ru!ed in the a*ove)entioned 2uido ase '' that whi!e TCT No. (44-- and its derivative tit!es, whi h in !ude TCT No. B1(',(, serve as eviden e of an indefeasi*!e tit!e to the propert. in favor of the persons whose na)es appear therein, this Court too% <udi ia! noti e of the fa t that ertain portions of the !and overed *. TCT No. (44-- either >were in possession of o upants who su essfu!!. o*tained ertifi ates of tit!es over the area o upied *. the)> or were o upied *. persons >who had not o*tained ertifi ates of tit!es over the area possessed *. the) *ut the !en&ths of their possession were !on& enou&h to a)ount to ownership, had the !and *een in fa t unre&istered.> This Court then pro eeded

to ru!e that whi!e pres ription is unavai!in& a&ainst the owners of the !and overed *. TCT No. (44--, on the &round that the. are ho!ders of a va!id ertifi ate of tit!e, the e;uita*!e presu)ption of !a hes )a. *e app!ied a&ainst the) for fai!ure to assert their ownership for su h an unreasona*!e !en&th of ti)e. This proha vi e ru!in& of the Court was further *ased on the esta*!ished fa t that the a*ove)entioned owners, *. a&ree)ent with the Offi e of the So!i itor 2enera!, have a tua!!. waived their ri&hts over the propert. su*<e t of the said ase in favor of >those who possessed and a tua!!. o upied spe ifi portions and o*tained Torrens Certifi ates of Tit!es, and those who possessed ertain spe ifi portions for su h !en&th of ti)e as to a)ount to fu!! ownership.> '( This Court, thus, he!d that it is i)perative for those possessors, whose a!!e&ed *ona fide o upan . of spe ifi portions of TCT No. (44-- is not eviden ed *. Torrens Tit!es, to prove their !ai)s in an appropriate pro eedin&. /)on& these o upants was, respondents? prede essor1in1interest, /ntonia Vi torino who, as found *. the RTC in its assai!ed de ision has du!. proven that, to&ether with her prede essor1in1interest, she has *een in pu*!i , pea efu!, ontinuous, adverse possession a&ainst the who!e wor!d and in the on ept of an owner of the su*<e t !ot for a period of )ore than thirt. 04,$ .ears.'4 /s to the a!!e&ed denia! of petitioner?s ri&ht to due pro ess due to /ntonia Vi torino?s fai!ure to identif. petitioner as indispensa*!e part. in her app!i ation for re&istration, as we!! as to serve her with a tua! and persona! noti e, Se tion '# of Presidentia! De ree No. '#(7 si)p!. re;uires that the app!i ation for re&istration sha!! >state the fu!! na)es and addresses of a!! o upants of the !and and those of the ad<oinin& owners, if %nown, and, if not %nown, it sha!! state the e=tent of the sear h )ade to find the).> / perusa! of /ntonia Vi torino?s /pp!i ation'" shows that she enu)erated the ad<oinin& owners. She a!so indi ated therein that, to the *est of her %now!ed&e, no person has an. interest or is in possession of the su*<e t !and. The fa t that she did not identif. petitioner as an o upant or an ad<oinin& owner is not tanta)ount to denia! of petitioner?s ri&ht to due pro ess and does not nu!!if. the RTC De ision &rantin& su h app!i ation. Besides, the C/ was orre t in ho!din& that a !and re&istration ase, !i%e the one at *ar, is a pro eedin& in re). This Court has a!read. ru!ed that in !and re&istration pro eedin&s, *ein& in re), there is no ne essit. to &ive persona! noti e to the owners or !ai)ants of the !and sou&ht to *e re&istered in order to vest the ourts with power and authorit. over the res.'# Boreover, sin e no issue was raised as to /ntonia Vi torino?s o)p!ian e with the prere;uisites of noti e and pu*!i ation, she is dee)ed to have fo!!owed su h re;uire)ents. /s a onse;uen e, petitioner is dee)ed suffi ient!. notified of the hearin& of /ntonia?s app!i ation. Hen e, she annot !ai) that she is denied due pro ess. /s to the fourth assi&ned error, the Court notes that there is nothin& repu&nant *etween this Court?s De ision in the 2uido ase and the /u&ust'#, '733 De ision of the RTC. In fa t, the for)er is, in effe t, a ratifi ation of the !atter. The *ona fide o upan ., whi h this Court, in the 2uido ase, re;uires to *e proven in appropriate pro eedin&s, has a!read. *een esta*!ished *. /ntonia Vi torino durin& the pro eedin&s !eadin& to the pro)u!&ation of the /u&ust '#, '733 De ision of the RTC. To under&o another pro ess for the purpose of provin& anew the *ona fide o upan . of /ntonia Vi torino, as insisted *. petitioner, wou!d *e redundant and a waste of the ourt?s as we!! as of the parties? pre ious ti)e and resour es. In re&ard to the a*ove dis;uisition, it *ears to revisit this Court?s ru!in& in E. Ro))e! Rea!t. and Deve!op)ent Corporation v. Sta. @u ia Rea!t. Deve!op)ent Corporation, '+ as orre t!. ited *. respondents. The ase invo!ves a par e! of !and in the possession of the respondent therein whi h, !i%e the su*<e t propert. in the instant ase, is part of the !ar&er tra t of !and overed *. the sa)e )other tit!e, TCT No. (44--. The respondent ontested the writ of possession issued *. the RTC awardin& possession of the su*<e t propert. in favor of herein petitioner and her o1heirs. The respondent in the said ase ar&ued that its prede essors1in1interest had a!read. proven their *ona fide o upan . thereof durin& the pro eedin&s in their app!i ation for re&istration of tit!e. /dvertin& to this Court?s ru!in& in the a*ove)entioned 2uido ase, this Court he!d thus5

==== De a&ree that respondent had a!read. proven its !ai) in an appropriate pro eedin&. In @.R.C. No. ,"71 B, initiated *. the heirs of de !a Cru: 0the prede essors of respondent$, it was shown that the possession of app!i ant heirs had a!read. ripened to ownership as of Bar h (7, '7-+.This ru!in& inured to respondent?s *enefit. The re ords do not show that respondent ever o*tained a ertifi ate of tit!e over the disputed propert.. Neverthe!ess, the ri&ht of ownership of respondent?s prede essors1in1interest had *een re o&ni:ed. /s the pur haser of the propert., respondent *e a)e the owner of the propert. and a ;uired the ri&ht to e=er ise a!! the attri*utes of ownership, in !udin& the ri&ht to possession 0<us possidendi$. Respondent, who was in a tua! possession of the propert. *efore the writ of possession was i)p!e)ented, possessed it as owner of the propert.. It an thus ri&htfu!!. assert its ri&ht of possession whi h is a)on& the *und!e of ri&hts en<o.ed *. an owner of a propert. under /rt. "(3 of the New Civi! Code. Hen e, respondent an ri&htfu!!. !ai) the superior ri&hts we a %now!ed&ed in Repu*!i v. C/ and the C/ orre t!. nu!!ified petitioner?s writ of possession insofar as it affe ted the propert. in the possession of respondent. = = = ='It is evident fro) the a*ove dis ussion that this Court &ave pri)ar. i)portan e to the fa t that the respondent in the a*ove;uoted ase was a*!e to ade;uate!. prove its !ai) of *ona fide o upan . over the su*<e t !ot, durin& the pro eedin&s in an app!i ation for re&istration of tit!e fi!ed *. its prede essors1in1 interest. In the sa)e )anner, respondents have proven their *ona fide o upan . throu&h the app!i ation for re&istration of tit!e fi!ed *. their prede essor1in1interest. Hen e, there is no need for another pro eedin& to prove that respondents and their prede essor1in1interest have o upied the su*<e t !ot honest!., open!. and in &ood faith. Dith respe t to the !ast assi&n)ent of error, this Court does not a&ree with petitioner?s ontention that she was further denied due pro ess when then C/ /sso iate Austi e Bartin S. Vi!!ara)a, Ar., who is now a )e)*er of this Court, was a!!owed to parti ipate and vote as a )e)*er of the C/ Division whi h rendered the present!. assai!ed De ision, onsiderin& that he rendered the /u&ust '#, '733 De ision of the RTC whi h &ranted /ntonia Vi torino?s app!i ation for re&istration. This Court ;uotes, with approva!, the dis;uisition of the C/ in its O to*er (#, (,,- Reso!ution, to wit5 ==== /nent Petitioner?s Botion for C!arifi ation, Petitioner as%ed if the Hon. Austi e Bartin S. Vi!!ara)a, Ar., Chair)an of this Division, was the presidin& Aud&e of the Re&iona! Tria! Court of Pasi&, Bran h '#+, who rendered the /u&ust '#, '733 De ision. Petitioner, thus, a!!e&ed that >there is so)ethin& serious!. a)iss> whi h affe ts this Court?s De ision, dated Septe)*er +, (,,-. There is nothin& serious!. a)iss whether !e&a!!., )ora!!. or ethi a!!. a*out the parti ipation of Austi e Vi!!ara)a, Ar. True, Austi e Vi!!ara)a, Ar. was the ponente of the /u&ust '#, '733De ision of the RTC. Indeed, De indi ated the sa)e in Our De ision, footnote nu)*er '#, pa&e # of the De ision. It is !i%ewise true that Austi es under Se tion ', Ru!e '4- of the Ru!es of Court , are prohi*ited fro) sittin& >in an. ase F in whi h he has presided in an. inferior ourt when his ru!in& or de ision is the su*<e t of review.> However, a arefu! review of the re ords of this ase wi!! show that a!thou&h Austi e Vi!!ara)a, Ar. penned the /u&ust '#, '733 RTC De ision, said De ision had a!read. attained fina!it. on or *efore Nove)*er 4,

'733 and was not the su*<e t of review in this Petition. Said /u&ust '#, '733 de ision, whi h is a fina! <ud&)ent, was )ere!. in identa! or part of the >histor.> of the ase. /ttention is invited to the fa t that the issues raised *. Petitioner in this ase revo!ved on!. on the a!!e&ed inva!idit. of said /!ias De ree and the annotation. It is the issuan e of the De ree in the na)e of the Private Respondent and the annotation thereof to Petitioner?s tit!e whi h initiated this Petition for Certiorari, or the Orders dated Nove)*er '7, (,,(, dated Bar h +, (,,4 and dated Septe)*er (, (,,4. Said orders, however, were no !on&er penned *. then Aud&e Vi!!ara)a, Ar. *ut *. respondent Aud&e /!e= @. Juiro:, Austi e Vi!!ara)a, Ar.?s su essor. C!ear!., the /u&ust '#, '733 De ision penned *. then Aud&e Vi!!ara)a, Ar. was not in issue or under review in this Petition for whi h a <udi ia! offi er is prohi*ited fro) parti ipatin&. The fa t a!one that the issuan es under review in this Petition, in effe t, affir)s the fina! and e=e utor. RTC de ision, dated /u&ust '#,'733, does not )ean that this Court a ted with partia!it. and without the ne essar. pruden e in renderin& Our De ision, dated Septe)*er +, (,,-. Our De ision was rendered after <udi ious review of the !aw, the re ords and the <urispruden e. = = = ='3 Notin& that Austi e Vi!!ara)a no !on&er too% part in the a*ove;uoted Reso!ution of the C/, this Court finds nothin& erroneous or irre&u!ar in the a*ove ru!in& of the appe!!ate ourt. DHERE6ORE, the instant petition for review on ertiorari is DENIED. The De ision and Reso!ution of the Court of /ppea!s in C/12.R.SP No. 3,#4", dated Septe)*er +, (,,- and O to*er (#, (,,-, respe tive!., are /66IRBED. SO ORDERED. DIOSDADO 2. 4ERA!TA /sso iate Austi e DE CONCER5 4RES3ITERO 5. "E!ASCO, 5R. /sso iate Austi e Chairperson

RO3ERTO A. A3AD /sso iate Austi e

3IEN"ENIDO !. RE(ESM /sso iate Austi e

2AR"IC 2ARIO "ICTOR $. !EONEN /sso iate Austi e /TTEST/TION I attest that the on !usions in the a*ove De ision had *een rea hed in onsu!tation *efore the ase was assi&ned to the writer of the opinion of the Court?s Division. 4RES3ITERO 5. "E!ASCO, 5R. /sso iate Austi e Chairperson, Third Division CERTI6IC/TION

Pursuant to Se tion '4, /rti !e VIII of the Constitution and the Division Chairperson?s /ttestation, I ertif. that the on !usions in the a*ove De ision had *een rea hed in onsu!tation *efore the ase was assi&ned to the writer of the opinion of the Court?s Division. 2ARIA !OURDES 4. A. SERENO Chief Austi e