Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 61 views

    Rep v. CA

    Uploaded by

    King Badong
    This case involves a petition by the Republic of the Philippines to annul the registration of 885 hectares of public forest land in Mulanay, Quezon in the names of private individuals based on an alleged Spanish title. The trial court denied the petition. The Court of Appeals affirmed on the ground that the solicitor general's appeal was untimely. The Supreme Court held that (1) the solicitor general should not be bound by the acts of its surrogates and was not late in filing its appeal; and (2) the land in question is public forest land and therefore not subject to private registration, as it was properly classified and certified as such by the Director of Forestry. The registration of the land

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rep v. CA

    Uploaded by

    King Badong
    61 views2 pages
    This case involves a petition by the Republic of the Philippines to annul the registration of 885 hectares of public forest land in Mulanay, Quezon in the names of private individuals based on an alleged Spanish title. The trial court denied the petition. The Court of Appeals affirmed on the ground that the solicitor general's appeal was untimely. The Supreme Court held that (1) the solicitor general should not be bound by the acts of its surrogates and was not late in filing its appeal; and (2) the land in question is public forest land and therefore not subject to private registration, as it was properly classified and certified as such by the Director of Forestry. The registration of the land

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a petition by the Republic of the Philippines to annul the registration of 885 hectares of public forest land in Mulanay, Quezon in the names of private individuals based on an alleged Spanish title. The trial court denied the petition. The Court of Appeals affirmed on the ground that the solicitor general's appeal was untimely. The Supreme Court held that (1) the solicitor general should not be bound by the acts of its surrogates and was not late in filing its appeal; and (2) the land in question is public forest land and therefore not subject to private registration, as it was properly classified and certified as such by the Director of Forestry. The registration of the land

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    61 views2 pages

    Rep v. CA

    Uploaded by

    King Badong
    This case involves a petition by the Republic of the Philippines to annul the registration of 885 hectares of public forest land in Mulanay, Quezon in the names of private individuals based on an alleged Spanish title. The trial court denied the petition. The Court of Appeals affirmed on the ground that the solicitor general's appeal was untimely. The Supreme Court held that (1) the solicitor general should not be bound by the acts of its surrogates and was not late in filing its appeal; and (2) the land in question is public forest land and therefore not subject to private registration, as it was properly classified and certified as such by the Director of Forestry. The registration of the land

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs.

    COURT OF APPEALS, SPOUSES PRUDENCIO MAXINO


    and TARCIANA MORALES, PEDRO GONZALES, ROGELIO AQUINO, Minor represented by his father,
    Manuel Aquino, and ALEJANDRO, SOCORRO, MERCEDES, CONCHITA, REMEDIOS and FLORA, all
    surnamed CONSOLACION, respondents.

    Facts:

    This is about the validity of the registration of 885 hectares of public forestal land located in Mulanay,
    Quezon.

    In Land Registration Case No. 81-G of the Court of First Instance at Gumaca, Quezon, Judge Vicente del
    Rosario on March 21, 1981 rendered a decision, ordering the registration of said land, Lot 1, allegedly
    located at Barrio Cambuga (Anonang), Mulanay, in the names of the spouses Prudencio Maxino and
    Tarciana Morales, less 200 hectares which should be registered in the names of the Heirs of Lorenzo
    Consolacion. The decision became final and executory. A decree and an original certificate of title were
    issued.

    More than eight years later, or on June 20, 1969, the Republic of the Philippines filed with the Gumaca court
    an amended petition to annul the decision, decree and title on the ground that they are void because the
    land in question was still a part of the unclassified public forest. Moreover, the possessory information title
    relied upon by the Maxino spouses covered only 29 hectares of land and not 885 hectares. The petition was
    verified by the Acting Director of Forestry.

    Petition was denied.

    A copy of the order was transmitted by the fiscal to the Solicitor General’s Office only on September 2, 1971
    or nearly one year from the issuance of the order, Twenty-two days thereafter or on September 24 the
    Solicitor General appealed from that order and filed a motion for extension of time within which to submit
    a record on appeal. The appeal was given due course.

    On appeal, the petition was denied on the ground that the 1970 order had allegedly long become final and
    unappealable. The Solicitor General appealed to this Court.

    The basis of the claim of the Maxinos is a Spanish title, Exhibit G, a gratuitous composition title or adjustment
    title issued on July 30, 1888 to Prudencio Tesalona pursuant to the Royal Decree of December 26, 1884 for
    29 hectares of pasture land (pasto de animales) allegedly bounded by the Yamay and Campalacio Creeks.**

    Issue:

    1. Procedural: w/n the solicitor general should be bound by the acts of its surrogates – NO.
    2. Substantive: w/n the issuance of certificate of title was proper

    Held:

    1. the Solicitor General’s Office should be served with the final order disposing of the petition and
    should not be bound by the service on his surrogates, the special counsel and the fiscal.

    The fact that after the record on appeal was filed on time, the Solicitor General’s Office was late in
    filing the amendments to it is of no moment. In exceptional cases, like the instant case, the interest
    of justice may warrant waiver of the rules
    2. the 885-hectare area registered by the Maxinos, is within the public forest, not alienable and
    disposable nor susceptible of private appropriation. Its inclusion in the public forest was certified
    by Director of Forestry as per Land Classification Map and testimony of Lorenzo R. Tria, a forest
    station warden

    It is axiomatic that public forestal land is not registerable. Its inclusion in a title, whether the title be
    issued during the Spanish regime or under the Torrens system, nullifies the title.
    Possession of public forestal lands, however long, cannot ripen into private ownership. Spanish
    titles are not indefeasible.

    The instant case bears similarities to Ramirez and Bayot de Ramirez vs vs. Director of Lands, 60 Phil.
    114, where an adjustment title issued in 1896 was held to be void because it was fraudulent and it
    covered public forestal land not subject to registration.

    Incidentally, it may be mentioned that Presidential Decree No. 892 effective February 18, 1976
    discontinued the use of Spanish titles as evidence in land registration proceedings.

    You might also like