Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Facts: private respondents filed against Javier for the reconveyance of parcel of land
known as lot 12. The respondents allged that lot 12 is a portion of a big parcel of land
designated as lot 6 and covered by TCT issued by register of deeds. Javier claimed
they acquired the land by prescription. RTC, CA ruled in favor of priv.respondents.
The defense of prescription of the cause of action for recovery of possession by the
registered owner is without merit. The established rule is that one cannot acquire title
to a registered land by prescription or adverse possession. Laches is likewise not
available because there are no intervening rights of third persons which may be
affected or prejudiced by a decision ordering the return of the lots. Hence, the
equitable defense of laches will not apply against the registered owners.
Facts: respondents are the owners of 2 parcels of land located in sampaloc through a
deed of absolute sale and tolerated the petitioners continued occupancy and
possession until possession became illegal. They sought to recover possession
through accion publiciana filed with the RTC against madrid and bernardo. Antonio
Miranda claimed ownership by an oral sale by the original owner, Antonio. Likewise,
Bernardo also claims ownership by virtue of an oral sale to him by Antonio. Madrid
claimed he had permission of bernardo, son of Antonio, to occupy the portion of the
property. RTC ruled in favor of respondents and CA affirmed. On appeal, petitioners
contend principle of indefeasibility of certificate of title does not apply because fraud
attended the respondents acquisition of title.
Facts: aranda filed for the registration of a land loc in batangas. He invokes that he
has been in continuous possession of the subj land in the concept of an owner,
publicly, openly, and adversely for more than 30 yrs prior to the filing of application. As
testified by one luis olan, anatalio aranda (ramons father) acquired the land from his
father by sale and as testified by ramons sister their father donated the land to
ramon. The trial court granted the application. Republic opposed and appealed to CA
which reversed the trial court decision.
Held: The Property Registration Decree (P.D. No. 1529) provides for original
registration of land in an ordinary registration proceeding. Under Section
14(1) thereof, a petition may be granted upon compliance with the following
requisites: (a) that the property in question is alienable and disposable land of
the public domain; (b) that the applicants by themselves or through their
predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious possession and occupation; and (c) that such possession is under
a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
Under the Regalian doctrine which is embodied in Section 2, Article XII of
the 1987 Constitution, all lands of the public domain belong to the State,
which is the source of any asserted right to ownership of land. All lands not
appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to
the State. Unless public land is shown to have been reclassified or alienated
to a private person by the State, it remains part of the inalienable public
domain. To overcome this presumption, incontrovertible evidence must be
established that the land subject of the application is alienable or disposable.
To prove that the land subject of an application for registration is alienable,
an applicant must establish the existence of a positive act of the government
such as a presidential proclamation or an executive order; an administrative