Case Digest (G.R. No. 191615)
Facts:
Victoria P. Cabral v. Heirs of Florencio Adolfo and Heirs of Elias Policarpio, G.R. No. 191615, August 02, 2017, Supreme Court Third Division, Tijam, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Victoria P. Cabral claims ownership of parcels originally covered by Original Certificate of Title No. 0-1670 (later OCT No. 0-220 (M)) in Barangay Purok (formerly Iba), Meycauayan, Bulacan; the dispute centers on portions of Lot 4 of Plan Psu-164390. In 1972 the Ministry of Agrarian Reform placed the land under the Operation Land Transfer (OLT) program pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27. Petitioner sought conversion of her holdings to non-agricultural purposes in 1973; a DAR district officer later indorsed that the parcel was not included in OLT and recommended conversion.
Emancipation Patents (EPs) were issued in 1988 to several farmer-beneficiaries (including Florencio Adolfo and Elias Policarpio) and corresponding Transfer Certificates of Title (TCTs) were registered in 1989. Petitioner filed administrative protests: a January 1990 petition before the Barangay Agrarian Reform Council (BARC) and another before DAR; the DAR Regional Director dismissed the DAR petition, but this Court later held in 2001 that the PARAD (Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator) has jurisdiction over cancellation of EPs.
In 1994 petitioner filed an OLT Letter Protest; the DAR Regional Director and DAR Secretary (in a July 12, 1996 order) found the lands covered by P.D. No. 27 despite later zoning reclassification, citing Administrative Order No. 06-94 and E.O. No. 228. Petitioner then filed, on August 16, 2003, a Petition for Cancellation of Emancipation Patents and Torrens Titles before the PARAD, alleging prior reclassification to residential use, absence of CLTs, lack of due process and nonpayment of just compensation; she submitted zoning certifications dated February 24, 1983 and August 28, 1989.
On June 18, 2004 the PARAD ruled for petitioner and ordered cancellation of the EPs/TCTs and revival of the OCT in petitioner's name (as to Lot 4). The DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB) affirmed on July 29, 2008. Respondents appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). In CA-G.R. SP No. 108518 the CA, relying on Secretary Garilao’s 1996 order, reversed and set aside the DARAB decision and dismissed the petition on November 23, 2009; the CA denied reconsideration on March 15, 2010.
Petitioner filed this Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari assailing the CA Decision and Resolution. The Court also noted tha...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in reversing the PARAD and DARAB orders cancelling the subject EPs/TCTs?
- Are the respondents' EPs and TCTs immune from attack by prescription or indefeasible by reason of r...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)