Case Digest (G.R. No. L-37312)
Facts:
Marcos B. Comilang v. The Honorable Court of Appeals (Fifth Division), Abdon Delenela, Guillermo Perez, Dominga Comilang and Esteban Comilang, G.R. No. L-37312, July 15, 1975, Second Division, Antonio, J., writing for the Court.
About 1908 Nicolas Comilang located the Bua Fraction Mineral Claim (roughly 76,809 sq. m.) in Tuding, Benguet; he later abandoned exploration but continued to occupy a house on part of the land. Around 1918 Macario Comilang settled on about one and one-half (1-1/2) hectares within the area; his daughter Fabiana (later Fabiana Comilang Perez) and other relatives subsequently occupied portions of the same property. Over time separate possessory or surface occupations developed among members of the Comilang family and related occupants including Marcos Comilang, Abdon Delenela and Guillermo Perez.
Several suits and administrative actions followed. In Civil Case No. 250 (Court of First Instance, Baguio City) decided November 26, 1952, the trial court dismissed the competing ownership claims and declared the area public land, but recognized specified possessions including about 1-1/2 hectares then declared for taxation in Marcos Comilang’s name; the Court of Appeals affirmed on October 29, 1955. A sheriff’s execution sale on June 1, 1957 disposed of the 1-1/2 hectares to judgment creditors (spouses Coloma), and on June 11, 1958 Delenela and Perez redeemed and acquired the Colomas’ rights with Marcos’s apparent acquiescence. Separately, the parties submitted an amicable settlement in Civil Case No. 735 (CFI, Baguio) resulting in a March 3, 1958 judgment declaring co-ownership of the Bua mineral claim: one-half undivided to Marcos Comilang, one-half to Delenela and co-heirs. An application for a lode patent was prosecuted and the Director of Mines recommended issuance February 9, 1959 reflecting that division.
This Court previously resolved related disputes. In De Comilang v. Delenela, et al. (reported at 10 SCRA 598 / cited in the decision) the Court held that the certificate of sale and execution order referred to the residential surface only and did not transfer the mineral claim; the Court nonetheless sustained the purchasers’ possession of the 1-1/2 hectares. In Comilang v. Buendia, et al. (G.R. No. L-24757, 21 SCRA 486, promulgated October 25, 1967) the Court reiterated that surface rights are severable from mineral rights and that the lode patent could not lawfully include the 1-1/2 hectares already sold in execution.
Despite those prior rulings, the Court of First Instance of Baguio and Benguet, in Civil Case No. 848 (an action for partition filed by Marcos Comilang against Delenela, Perez and others), rendered a decision on December ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the private respondents properly raise the defense of res judicata in the trial court proceedings?
- Does the doctrine of res judicata (or conclusiveness of prior judgment) bar relitigation of ownership of the one and one-half (1-1/2) hectares that were previously adjudicated in prior Supreme Court decisions?
- Was the Court of First Instance empowered to partition the Bua Fra...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)