Title
Lao vs. Heirs of Alburo
Case
G.R. No. 10372
Decision Date
Dec 24, 1915
Applicants sought land registration in Binondo, Manila; objected by heirs claiming a stone wall as a party wall. Supreme Court ruled wall exclusively owned by applicants, reversing lower court's decision.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 10372)

Facts:

Domingo Lao and Albina de los Santos v. The Heirs of Lorenza Alburo, G.R. No. 10372, December 24, 1915, the Supreme Court, Torres, J., writing for the Court.

The applicants Domingo Lao and Albina de los Santos sought registration in the Court of Land Registration of four urban parcels (Lots No. 1–4) with buildings, filing their application on May 8, 1914. The application described the parcels’ locations in Binondo and San Nicolas, gave areas and appraised values, recited that the properties were unencumbered, and traced the applicants’ acquisitions by public instruments (with dates and vendors specified in the application). The applicants occupied one parcel and leased others; the application also named adjoining owners.

After notice, the administrator of the estate of the deceased Lorenza Alburo filed an objection limited to Lot No. 2, asserting that a stone wall shown on the plan northeast of Lot No. 2 belonged to the deceased Alburo’s estate, had existed since March 8, 1881, had borne principal timbers of Alburo’s building for over thirty-five years, and had been in quiet and uninterrupted possession of Alburo’s successors.

At the Court of Land Registration trial both parties introduced documentary and oral evidence and the judge made a personal inspection of the disputed wall and adjacent properties. By judgment of August 17, 1914 the Court of Land Registration found that the applicants had satisfactorily proven title and possession and decreed registration of the four parcels in their names, but held that the stone wall between Lot No. 2 and the adjoining property was a party wall (an easement of common ownership) and recorded that finding.

The applicants excepted to the court’s rulin...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Is the disputed stone wall between Lot No. 2 and the adjoining property a party wall (an easement in common) or does it belong exclusively to the appli...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.