Facts:

The case involves petitioners Nicanor Acierto and Francisco Bayubay against respondents Vicente Gacias, Zacarias Telan, Gregorio de la Cuesta, Candido Telan, and the Intermediate Appellate Court. The events leading to this case began when Acierto and Bayubay filed an accion publiciana on September 12, 1972, in the Court of First Instance of Cagayan, seeking to recover possession of a parcel of land identified as Lot 1, Psu-122482, located in Patagueleg, Paraba, Penablanca, Cagayan, covering approximately 70,697 square meters. The original complaint was amended to include Claribel Gacias as a defendant after Vicente Gacias passed away, and his heirs were subsequently substituted in the case. The trial court ruled in favor of the petitioners on August 24, 1982, declaring them the rightful owners of the land and ordering the defendants to vacate the property and pay damages for the unlawful deprivation of crops. The defendants appealed this decision to the Intermediate Appella...

Facts:

1. Parties and Subject Matter:

   • Petitioners: Nicanor Acierto and Francisco Bayubay.
   • Respondents: Vicente Gacias, Zacarias Telan, Gregorio de la Cuesta, Candido Telan, and the Intermediate Appellate Court.
   • The case involves the recovery of possession of Lot 1, Psu-122482, a 70,697-square-meter tract of land in Patagueleg, Paraba, Penablanca, Cagayan.

2. Procedural History:

   • Petitioners filed an accion publiciana (Civil Case No. 2049) in the Court of First Instance of Cagayan to recover possession of the land.
   • The original complaint was amended to include Claribel Gacias as a defendant, and heirs of deceased defendants were substituted.
   • The Trial Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring them owners of the land and ordering the respondents to vacate and pay damages.

3. Administrative Proceedings:

   • Parallel administrative proceedings in the Bureau of Lands involved conflicting claims over the land.
   • The Director of Lands, Nicanor G. Jorge, adjudicated the land in favor of Camila Gacias on April 8, 1965, reversing an earlier decision favoring Tomas Acierto’s heirs.
   • The Director found that Tomas Acierto died without legal heirs and failed to comply with homestead requirements, while Camila Gacias had occupied and cultivated the land since 1947.

4. Appeal to Intermediate Appellate Court:

   • Respondents appealed the Trial Court’s decision.
   • The Intermediate Appellate Court reversed the Trial Court, declaring Claribel Gacias the owner and ordering the petitioners to return possession of the land.

5. Petitioners’ Claims:

   • Petitioners claimed they never received the Director of Lands’ order denying their motion for reconsideration, arguing the decision was not final.
   • They filed the accion publiciana in 1972, asserting their rights over the land.

Issue:

1. Whether the findings of the Intermediate Appellate Court, which reversed the Trial Court’s decision, are binding on the Supreme Court.
2. Whether the petitioners’ claim of non-receipt of the Director of Lands’ order is sufficient to prevent the decision from becoming final.
3. Whether the petitioners’ delay in pursuing their claim constitutes laches or failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
4. Whether the Intermediate Appellate Court’s factual findings are supported by the evidence.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)