Case Digest (G.R. No. 210592)
Facts:
Regino Dela Cruz, substituted by his heirs, namely: Maria, Danilo, Regino, Juanito, Cecilia, Rosalina and Ceferino all surnamed Dela Cruz, represented by Ceferino Dela Cruz, petitioners, vs. Ireneo Domingo, Maro, Quezon, Nueva Ecija, and Register of Deeds North, Talavera, Nueva Ecija, respondents, G.R. No. 210592, November 22, 2017, the Supreme Court First Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court.Ireneo Domingo was the registered owner of a parcel totaling 13,165 square meters in San Miguel (Mambarao), Quezon, Nueva Ecija, covered by Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. EP-82013 and EP-82015 issued May 24, 1989. Regino Dela Cruz was a farmer-grantee who held Certificate of Land Transfer No. 0401815 (CLT 0401815) over one of three parcels he claimed as beneficiary land, but he did not possess an Emancipation Patent (EP) for the parcel later covered by Domingo’s titles.
Domingo filed three separate recovery-of-possession petitions before the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) (DARAB Case Nos. 298–300) alleging that Dela Cruz occupied his land only by tolerance; after Dela Cruz failed to timely answer, the DARAB Provincial Adjudicator rendered a consolidated Decision dated April 25, 2006 ordering Dela Cruz to vacate. Before resolution of his motions for reconsideration and to admit answer, Dela Cruz filed DARAB Case No. 372 (372'NNE'06) seeking annulment and cancellation of TCT EP-82013 and TCT EP-82015 on the ground that the lands were sold to him and that Domingo’s registration was tainted by fraud.
DARAB (Provincial Adjudicator Marvin Bernal) dismissed DARAB Case No. 372 on September 26, 2007 for lack of proof of sale and for failure to overcome the presumption of regularity in the issuance of the EPs and titles. Dela Cruz appealed to the DARAB Appeal Board (docketed DARAB Case No. 15566), which on December 3, 2009 affirmed the dismissal and held that petitioner's evidence (affidavits, receipts) was not substantial and that he was claiming a different landholding. A motion for reconsideration was denied by DARAB on April 5, 2010.
Petitioners brought a petition for review to the Court of Appeals, docketed CA‑G.R. SP No. 114223. On April 11, 2013 the Court of Appeals dismissed the petition on the ground of forum shopping, reasoning that Dela Cruz should have raised his ownership claim as a counterclaim in DARAB Case Nos. 298–300 and that the parties, issues, and causes of action were identical such that res judicata would result. A motion for reconsideration was denied by the CA on December 2, 2013.
Petitioners filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court (Rule 45) assailing the CA dispositions and contending there was...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did petitioners commit forum shopping or violate the rule on litis pendentia when they filed DARAB Case No. 372 while DARAB Case Nos. 298–300 were pending?
- Could petitioners properly seek cancellation of Emancipation Patents and transfer certificates of title as a compulsory counterclaim without running afoul of the rule that certificates of title can...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)