HEIRS OF MARIO MALABANAN, Petitioner, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent; G.R. No.

179987; April
29, 2009; TINGA, J.

FACTS:

On 20 February 1998, Mario Malabanan filed an application for land registration covering a parcel of land . He claimed that he
had purchased the property from Eduardo Velazco and that he and his predecessors-in-interest had been in open, notorious,
and continuous adverse and peaceful possession of the land for more than thirty (30) years. Among the evidence presented by
Malabanan during trial was a Certification dated 11 June 2001, issued by the Community Environment & Natural Resources
Office, Department of Environment and Natural Resources (CENRO-DENR), which stated that the subject property was "verified
to be within the Alienable or Disposable land. The Republic argued that Malabanan had failed to prove that the property
belonged to the alienable and disposable land of the public domain, and that the RTC had erred in finding that he had been in
possession of the property in the manner and for the length of time required by law for confirmation of imperfect title.

RULING:

Section 11 of the Public Land Act acknowledges that public lands suitable for agricultural purposes may be disposed of "by
confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles" through "judicial legalization." Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act, as amended by
P.D. No. 1073, supplies the details and unmistakably grants that right, subject to the requisites stated therein:

Sec. 48. The following described citizens of the Philippines, occupying lands of the public domain or claiming
to own any such land or an interest therein, but whose titles have not been perfected or completed, may
apply to the Court of First Instance of the province where the land is located for confirmation of their claims
and the issuance of a certificate of title therefor, under the Land Registration Act, to wit:

(b) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors in interest have been in open, continuous,
exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain,
under a bona fide claim of acquisition of ownership, since June 12, 1945, or earlier, immediately preceding
the filing of the application for confirmation of title except when prevented by war or force majeure. These
shall be conclusively presumed to have performed all the conditions essential to a Government grant and
shall be entitled to a certificate of title under the provisions of this chapter.

It bears further observation that Section 48(b) of Com. Act No, 141 is virtually the same as Section 14(1) of the Property
Registration Decree. Said Decree codified the various laws relative to the registration of property, including lands of the public
domain. It is Section 14(1) that operationalizes the registration of such lands of the public domain. The provision reads:

SECTION 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file in the proper Court of First Instance an application for
registration of title to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized representatives:

(1) those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of
ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.

It is clear that Section 48 of the Public Land Act is more descriptive of the nature of the right enjoyed by the possessor than
Section 14 of the Property Registration Decree, which seems to presume the pre-existence of the right, rather than establishing
the right itself for the first time. It is proper to assert that it is the Public Land Act, as amended by P.D. No. 1073 effective 25
January 1977, that has primarily established the right of a Filipino citizen who has been "in open, continuous, exclusive, and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain, under a bona fide claim of
acquisition of ownership, since June 12, 1945" to perfect or complete his title by applying with the proper court for the
confirmation of his ownership claim and the issuance of the corresponding certificate of title.
Section 48 can be viewed in conjunction with the afore-quoted Section 11 of the Public Land Act, which provides that public
lands suitable for agricultural purposes may be disposed of by confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles, and given the notion
that both provisions declare that it is indeed the Public Land Act that primarily establishes the substantive ownership of the
possessor who has been in possession of the property since 12 June 1945. In turn, Section 14(a) of the Property Registration
Decree recognizes the substantive right granted under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act, as well provides the corresponding
original registration procedure for the judicial confirmation of an imperfect or incomplete title.

There is another limitation to the right granted under Section 48(b). Section 47 of the Public Land Act limits the period within
which one may exercise the right to seek registration under Section 48. The provision has been amended several times, most
recently by Rep. Act No. 9176 in 2002. It currently reads thus:

Section 47. The persons specified in the next following section are hereby granted time, not to extend beyond
December 31, 2020 within which to avail of the benefits of this Chapter: Provided, That this period shall apply only
where the area applied for does not exceed twelve (12) hectares: Provided, further, That the several periods of time
designated by the President in accordance with Section Forty-Five of this Act shall apply also to the lands comprised in
the provisions of this Chapter, but this Section shall not be construed as prohibiting any said persons from acting under
this Chapter at any time prior to the period fixed by the President.24

Accordingly under the current state of the law, the substantive right granted under Section 48(b) may be availed of only until 31
December 2020.

We next ascertain the correct framework of analysis with respect to Section 14(2). The provision reads:

SECTION 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file in the proper Court of First Instance an application for
registration of title to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized representatives:

(2) Those who have acquired ownership over private lands by prescription under the provisions of existing
laws.

The Court in Naguit offered the following discussion concerning Section 14(2), which we did even then recognize, and still do, to
be an obiter dictum, but we nonetheless refer to it as material for further discussion, thus:

Did the enactment of the Property Registration Decree and the amendatory P.D. No. 1073 preclude the
application for registration of alienable lands of the public domain, possession over which commenced only
after June 12, 1945? It did not, considering Section 14(2) of the Property Registration Decree, which governs
and authorizes the application of "those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under
the provisions of existing laws."

Prescription is one of the modes of acquiring ownership under the Civil Code. There is a consistent jurisprudential rule that
properties classified as alienable public land may be converted into private property by reason of open, continuous and exclusive
possession of at least thirty (30) years. With such conversion, such property may now fall within the contemplation of "private
lands" under Section 14(2), and thus susceptible to registration by those who have acquired ownership through prescription.
Thus, even if possession of the alienable public land commenced on a date later than June 12, 1945, and such possession being
been open, continuous and exclusive, then the possessor may have the right to register the land by virtue of Section 14(2) of the
Property Registration Decree.

SYTHESIS

(1) In connection with Section 14(1) of the Property Registration Decree, Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act recognizes and
confirms that "those who by themselves or through their predecessors in interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain, under a bona fide claim of
acquisition of ownership, since June 12, 1945" have acquired ownership of, and registrable title to, such lands based on the
length and quality of their possession.

(a) Since Section 48(b) merely requires possession since 12 June 1945 and does not require that the lands should have been
alienable and disposable during the entire period of possession, the possessor is entitled to secure judicial confirmation of his
title thereto as soon as it is declared alienable and disposable, subject to the timeframe imposed by Section 47 of the Public
Land Act.

(b) The right to register granted under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act is further confirmed by Section 14(1) of the Property
Registration Decree.

(2) In complying with Section 14(2) of the Property Registration Decree, consider that under the Civil Code, prescription is
recognized as a mode of acquiring ownership of patrimonial property. However, public domain lands become only patrimonial
property not only with a declaration that these are alienable or disposable. There must also be an express government
manifestation that the property is already patrimonial or no longer retained for public service or the development of national
wealth, under Article 422 of the Civil Code. And only when the property has become patrimonial can the prescriptive period for
the acquisition of property of the public dominion begin to run.

(a) Patrimonial property is private property of the government. The person acquires ownership of patrimonial property by
prescription under the Civil Code is entitled to secure registration thereof under Section 14(2) of the Property Registration
Decree.

(b) There are two kinds of prescription by which patrimonial property may be acquired, one ordinary and other extraordinary.
Under ordinary acquisitive prescription, a person acquires ownership of a patrimonial property through possession for at least ten
(10) years, in good faith and with just title. Under extraordinary acquisitive prescription, a persons uninterrupted adverse
possession of patrimonial property for at least thirty (30) years, regardless of good faith or just title, ripens into ownership.

APPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINES TO THE CASE AT BAR

It is clear that the evidence of petitioners is insufficient to establish that Malabanan has acquired ownership over the subject
property under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act. There is no substantive evidence to establish that Malabanan or petitioners
as his predecessors-in-interest have been in possession of the property since 12 June 1945 or earlier. The earliest that
petitioners can date back their possession, according to their own evidencethe Tax Declarations they presented in particular
is to the year 1948. Thus, they cannot avail themselves of registration under Section 14(1) of the Property Registration Decree.

Neither can petitioners properly invoke Section 14(2) as basis for registration. While the subject property was declared as
alienable or disposable in 1982, there is no competent evidence that is no longer intended for public use service or for the
development of the national evidence, conformably with Article 422 of the Civil Code. The classification of the subject property as
alienable and disposable land of the public domain does not change its status as property of the public dominion under Article
420(2) of the Civil Code. Thus, it is insusceptible to acquisition by prescription.