VICTORIA ONG DE OCSIO, petitioner,

vs.
COURT OF APPEALS and the RELIGIOUS OF THE VIRGIN
MARY, represented by M.O. Leoncia Pacquing, R.V.M.,
respondents
A cadastral proceedings initiated by the Director of
Lands, in behalf of the Republic, for the settlement and
adjudication of title to a large tract of land measuring
261.5791 hectares, divided into 1,419 lots, situated in
the City of Iligan.
Victoria Ong de Ocsio (herein petitioner) seasonably
presented an answer to the petition.
She alleged that:
1. she was the owner, by purchase, of two (2)
parcels of land with specific boundaries
comprehended in the cadastral proceeding:
a. Lot No. 1272, measuring 256 square
meters, and
b. Lot 1273 a road lot, measuring 21
square meters; and
2. she had been in possession as owner, of both
lots for fifteen (15) years, and her
predecessors-in-interest, for sixty (60) years.
3. In relation to Section 11, Article XIV of the 1973
Constitution, she asserts that as the private
respondent is a religious corporation, it is
disqualified to obtain judicial confirmation
of an imperfect title under Section 48(b) of the
Public Land Act which grants that right only to
natural persons. Citing Manila Electric Co. v.
Castro-Bartolome, 114 SCRA 799 (1982) and
Republic v. Villanueva, 114 SCRA 875 (1982)
a. contends that a corporation is not
among those that may apply for
confirmation of title under Section 48
of Commonwealth Act No. 141, the
Public Land Act.
Title to the same parcels of land was however
claimed by the Religious of the Virgin Mary. In its
answer, it averred that
1. it had bought the lots from Victoria Ong de
Ocsio and
2. had been in possession as owner thereof for
over four years, and its possession and that of
its predecessors was immemorial.
The Cadastral Court rendered judgment, declaring
that the evidence satisfactorily established that
Victoria Ong de Ocsio had in truth sold Lot
No. 1272 to the Religious of the Virgin Mary
in virtue of a deed of sale dated April 12,
1956 (Exhibit 1), and Lot No. 1273 was a road right
of way granted to the City of Iligan. The claim of
Victoria Ong de Ocsio with respect to said cadastral
lot is dismiss.
CA affirmed the ruling.
ISSUE: WON corporation is disqualified to obtain
judicial confirmation of an imperfect title?
RULING:
NO.

The cited rulings(Manila Electric Case and Villanueva

case) no longer control.
Current doctrine, first announced by the Court en banc
in Director of Lands v. I.A.C. 146 SCRA 509 (1986), is
that open, continuous and exclusive possession of
alienable public land for at least thirty (30) years in
accordance with the Public Land Act ipso jure
converts the land to private property, and a
juridical person who thereafter acquires the
same may have title thereto confirmed in its
name.
A private corporation had purchased the land originally
of the public domain from parties who had, by
themselves and through their predecessors-in-interest,
possessed and occupied it since time immemorial. It
had thereafter instituted proceedings for confirmation
of title under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act. In
upholding its right to do so, the court held that the fact
that the proceedings had been instituted by said
purchaser in its own name and not in the name of the
transferors was "xx simply xx (an) accidental
circumstance, productive of a defect hardly more than
procedural and in nowise affecting the substance and
merits of the right of ownership sought to be
confirmed."
The ruling was reaffirmed in two later cases, Director of
Lands v. Manila Electric Co., 153 SCRA 686 (September
11, 1987), and Republic v. C.A., 156 SCRA 344 (October
30, 1987) where the same question of law was raised.
Additional Background lang.
The Director of Lands interposed this petition raising the issue of
whether or not a corporation may apply for registration of title to land.
Director vs Manila Electric
SC upheld the doctrine that open, exclusive and undisputed possession
of alienable public land for the period prescribed by law creates the
legal fiction whereby the land, upon completion of the requisite period
ipso jure and without the need of judicial or other sanction, ceases to
be public land and becomes private property.

In the latter it was expressly held that the

prohibitions in the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions
against acquisition or registration of lands by or
in behalf of private corporations do not apply to
public lands already converted to private ownership
by natural persons under the provisions of the Public
Land Act.
Ruled in Director vs Manila: if the land was already private at the
time Meralco bought it from Natividad, then the prohibition in the 1973
Constitution against corporations holding alienable lands of the public
domain except by lease (1973 Const., Art. XIV, See. 11) does not apply.

In the present case, Virginia Ong de Ocsio and her

predecessors-in-interest having possessed Lot No.
1272 for the period and under the conditions
prescribed by law for acquisition of ownership of
disposable public land prior to the sale of the property
to the Religious of the Virgin Mary, confirmation of title
thereto in the latter's name is, under the precedents
referred to, entirely in order.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. THE

HON. COURT OF APPEALS, and EMILIO BERNABE,
SR., EMILIO BERNABE, JR., LUZ BERNABE,

AMPARO BERNABE, and ELISA BERNABE,

Respondents.
Lot 622 of the Mariveles Cadastre was declared
as public land in a decision rendered in Cadastral
Case 19, LRC Cadastral Record 1097.
6 Jul 65: Lot 622 was segregated from the forest and
released and certified by the BOF as an agricultural
land for disposition under PLA.
26 Apr 67: Bernabes filed in CFI Bataan a petition to
reopen Cadastral Case 19, concerning portion of Lot
622 and of Lot 324, alleging that they have acquired
ownership & possession of the parcels by purchase
from the original owners thereof & that they have been
in OCEAN possession & in the concept of owners for
more than 30 yrs.
DOF filed an opposition, alleging that area involved is
within timberland & therefore, inalienable under the
Constitution. Upon verification, however, DOF found
that the area to be the timberland already released by
the government from the mass of public forests &
promptly withdrew his Opposition.
1 Sep 67: Acting Provincial Fiscal of Bataan, in behalf
of DOL, filed opposition, alleging that land is still public
land.
LC found that Bernabes have complied with all the
terms & conditions which would entitle them to a
grant. So Republic filed petition for review on the
grounds that the entire proceeding was vitiated by lack
of notice to the SolGen; that parcels of land are
portions of public domain; that Bernabes do not have
registerable title to the land.
ISSUE: WON the lots claimed by Bernabes could legally
be the subject of a judicial confirmation of title under
PLA

Negative.
A decision was rendered before the last war in
Cadastral Case No. 19 LRC Cadastral Record No. 1097,
declaring the lot in question as public land. Said lot was
declared public land by virtue of a court decision which
has become final and as held by the Supreme Court
aforesaid decision is res judicata. TC had not
jurisdiction to reopen the cadastral proceeding.
Furthermore, it is undisputed that aforesaid Lot No. 622
was released as an agricultural land for disposition
under Public Land Act only on July 6, 1965.
Sec. 48(b) of CA 141 applies exclusively to public
agricultural land. Forest lands or areas covered with
forests are excluded. They are incapable of registration
and their inclusion in a title, whether such title be one
issued during the Spanish sovereignty or under the
present Torrens system of registration, nullifies the
title. Thus, possession of forest lands, however long,
cannot ripen into private ownership.
Thus, even if the reopening of the cadastral
proceedings was at all possible, Bernabes have not
qualified for a grant under Sec. 48(b) of CA 141, the
facts being that Bernabes could only be credited with 1
year, 9 months and 20 days possession and occupation
of the lots involved, counted from July 6, 1965, the
date when the land area in sitio San Jose, barrio
Cabcaban, Mariveles, Bataan, known as Bataan PMD
No. 267, which includes the lots claimed by Bernabes,
had been segregated from the forest zone and released
by the Bureau of Forestry as an agricultural land for
disposition under the Public Land Act.