Case Digest (G.R. No. 240922)
Facts:
Tomas R. Leonidas v. Tancredo Vargas and Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 201031, December 14, 2017, Supreme Court First Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Tomas R. Leonidas filed an application for land registration on February 2, 2002 under the Land Registration Act/Presidential Decree No. 1529 (PD 1529), seeking adjudication and registration of Lot No. 566 and Lot No. 1677 in Concepcion, Iloilo (the subject lots). He alleged the lots were inherited from his parents and relied on a May 17, 1937 Certificate of Sale issued by the Provincial Treasurer of Iloilo, tax declarations, tax receipts, survey plans, and a CENRO certification attesting that the lots were within the alienable and disposable area. The Republic, through the Office of the Solicitor General, opposed the application, maintaining the lots are public domain and that petitioner and his predecessors-in-interest failed to prove the open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession required by Section 48 of Commonwealth Act No. 141 (CA 141) as amended.
On March 11, 2003, respondent Tancredo Vargas (who alleged he is the son and heir of Tomas Vargas) filed an opposition claiming ownership of certain portions (asserting Lot 1677-A and Lot 566-A) and asserting tax declarations and tax mapping supported his claim. A group of Sicads also opposed, asserting title by purchase and possession over another contested portion. At trial, petitioner and several witnesses testified and offered documentary evidence including the 1937 Certificate of Sale, various tax declarations and receipts, CENRO reports and survey plans; Tancredo and other witnesses testified to his family’s possession and tax declarations dating to 1945; the Sicads presented testimony and a deed of sale.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 66, Barotac Viejo, Iloilo, in a March 19, 2007 Decision adjudicated portions of Lot 566 (3.1161 ha) and Lot 1677 (3.7255 ha) to petitioner and adjudicated other portions (Lot 1677 — 2.3642 ha; Lot 566 — 1.1782 ha) to Tancredo, and directed the Land Registration Authority to issue titles after finality. Both petitioner and the Republic appealed; the appeals were consolidated as CA-G.R. CV No. 02296.
In an August 13, 2009 Decision, the Court of Appeals (CA) modified the RTC ruling: it reversed and set aside the portion of the RTC award favoring petitioner, and affirmed the portions awarded to Tancredo. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied by the CA in a February 22, 2012 Resolution. Petitioner then brought this Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court before the Suprem...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals gravely abuse its discretion in denying registration of petitioner’s claimed vested title to Lot Nos. 566 and 1677 and in awarding portions thereof to respondent Tancre...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)