Case Digest (G.R. No. 231459)
Facts:
Heirs of Paula C. Fabillar, as represented by Aureo Fabillar v. Miguel M. Paller, Florentina P. Abayan, and Demetria P. Sagales, G.R. No. 231459, January 21, 2019, Supreme Court Second Division, Perlas-Bernabe, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners are the heirs of Paula C. Fabillar (represented by Aureo Fabillar); respondents are Miguel M. Paller, Florentina P. Abayan, and Demetria P. Sagales. The dispute concerns a 3.1003-hectare parcel of agricultural coconut land in Sitio Cabotjo-an, Brgy. Parina, Giporlos, Eastern Samar (the subject land).
Respondents commenced the controversy by filing an Amended Complaint for Recovery of Ownership, Possession, and Damages (initial complaint March 1, 2004; amended August 29, 2006) in the 9th Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Giporlos-Quinapondan (MCTC), alleging that the subject land formed part of properties originally owned by their grandfather, Marcelino Paller, and that respondents’ predecessor, Ambrosio Paller, received a one-hectare portion by oral partition; respondents claimed ownership as his successors. Respondents also relied on an unnotarized 1959 deed of sale (in Waray) for another two-hectare portion and presented Ambrosio’s baptismal certificate as proof of filiation to Marcelino. They alleged the Custodios (Antonio and Matilda) and Paula had taken possession, prompting the suit after Demetria redeemed a mortgage in 2000 and found the Custodios in possession.
The Custodios answered denying Ambrosio’s filiation to Marcelino, contending the properties remained commonly owned and unpartitioned, and moved a Demurrer to Evidence, which the MCTC denied; both sides submitted evidence and raised the filiation issue at pretrial. The MCTC, in a Decision dated November 12, 2012, found for respondents, gave weight to Ambrosio’s baptismal certificate as proof of pedigree, declared respondents lawful owners, and ordered surrender of possession and damages. The Custodios appealed.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 42, Balangiga, Eastern Samar, affirmed the MCTC in a Decision on Appeal dated January 17, 2014, again treating Ambrosio’s baptismal certificate as persuasive and finding respondents prior possessors in concept of owner. The Custodios (with petitioners as heirs of Paula substituted after her death) elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (CA) by a petition for review under Rule 42. The CA, in a Decision dated August 31, 2016, affirmed the RTC, holding Ambrosio to be Marcelino’s son and rejecting, as belated, the defense that a declaration of heirship was required before the complaint (relying on the parties’ presentation of evidence at trial). A motion for reconsideration was denied by ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is a special proceeding for declaration of heirship required before a trial court may resolve heirship when filiation is contested in an action for recovery of ownership?
- Can Ambrosio’s baptismal certificate alone constitute competent proof of his filiation to Marcelino?
- Did respondents prove the identity of the land they sought to recover so as to ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)