Case Digest (G.R. No. L-41278)
Facts:
Director of Lands v. Hon. Pedro T. Santiago, Maria O. Garcia, and Imperial Development Corporation, G.R. No. L‑41278, April 15, 1988, Supreme Court Second Division, Sarmiento, J., writing for the Court.
On September 8, 1973, Maria O. Garcia filed an application for land registration in the Court of First Instance (CFI), Bataan, Branch II (Land Registration Case No. N‑260). A copy of the application was sent to the Solicitor General through the Director of Lands. On February 19, 1974 the Director of Lands filed a verified opposition to Garcia’s application; the Solicitor General entered appearance and authorized the Provincial Fiscal to appear at hearings.
Subsequently Imperial Development Corporation, with Garcia’s conformity, moved to substitute as applicant without changing the boundaries or area; the trial judge granted the substitution. A Notice of Initial Hearing was published and posted; it warned that a party failing to appear would be declared in default. On the initial hearing date, January 23, 1975, neither the Director of Lands nor his counsel was present and the respondent judge entered an order of general default. The court proceeded to receive the applicant’s evidence, and on February 17, 1975 rendered a decision adjudicating the lands in favor of Imperial Development Corporation.
The Director of Lands moved for a new trial on the ground that his counsel’s absence was excusable and that the decision was contrary to law and facts; the motion was denied (order dated August 7, 1975). The petitioner then filed a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court seeking to annul: (a) the order admitting the amended application (Sept. 30, 1974); (b) the default order (Jan. 23, 1975); (c) the decision adjudicating the lands (Feb. 17, 1975); and (d) the denial of the motion for new trial (Aug. 7, 1975); he also prayed mandamus to compel the CF...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was certiorari a proper and available remedy to challenge the CFI’s declaration of general default where the oppositor had previously filed a verified opposition?
- Was the order of general default valid when the Director of Lands had already filed a verified opposition/answer prior to the initial hearing?
- Did the trial court gravely abuse its discretion in granting registration to Imperial Development Corporation — in particular, was there sufficient proof under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act that the lands were agricultural and ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)