Case Digest (G.R. No. 161042)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines v. Agripina dela Raga, G.R. No. 161042, August 24, 2009, the Supreme Court First Division, Carpio, J., writing for the Court. The Court’s disposition was concurred in by Puno, C.J. (Chairperson), Corona, Leonardo-De Castro, and Bersamin, JJ.The respondent, Agripina dela Raga, is the granddaughter and sole surviving heir of spouses Ignacio Serran and Catalina Laguit. She possessed and occupied a 79,570-square-meter parcel in Barrio Dungon, Sison, Pangasinan, which she believed was covered by Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. 49266. While seeking a duplicate of OCT No. 49266, she discovered Decree No. 196266 showing the property in the names of the conjugal partnerships of Ignacio Serran and Catalina Laguit, and Felipe Serafica and Cornelia Serran.
On December 8, 1998, Dela Raga filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 47, Urdaneta, Pangasinan (Pet. Case No. U-1449), for the reconstitution of OCT No. 49266 in the names reflected in Decree No. 196266. She alleged filiation to Ignacio through her mother Aniceta Serran, long possession as owner, loss of the owner’s duplicate, and inability of the Register of Deeds to locate the office copy. Documentary exhibits included the petition, a Register of Deeds certification that the title could not be found, a pre-war inventory showing the entry for OCT No. 49266, the original registration application and related decrees, and tax receipts; testimonial evidence included Dela Raga and Pascua Estibar.
On November 18, 1999 the RTC (Judge Meliton G. Emuslan) granted the petition and ordered reconstitution, finding Dela Raga to be Ignacio’s granddaughter, that the property had been covered by OCT No. 49266 which was destroyed in the war, and that the petitioner had complied with jurisdictional requirements and submitted sufficient evidence (application for registration, Decree No. 196266, pre-war inventory, tax receipts, and testimony).
The Republic of the Philippines appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CV No. 66687). The Republic argued, inter alia, that the petitioner failed to prove her relationship to Ignacio and that the Register of Deeds’ certification was deficient because it did not verify that the OCT was valid and subsisting nor whether another title covered the same property, as required by paragraph 12 of LRA Circular No. 35.
On November 18, 2003 the Court of Appeals (penned by Associate Justice Arsenio J. Magpale, with Associate Justices Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr. and Bienvenido L. Reyes concurring) affirmed the RTC in toto, holding that the Republic failed to rebut the RTC’s factual findings and that the absence of an active opposition by the Register of Deeds was material — the Register of Deeds had been notified but did not file any opposition.
(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the petitioner fail to prove that Original Certificate of Title No. 49266 was valid and subsisting at the time of its alleged loss or destruction?
- Is the Register of Deeds’ report verifying the status of the title an indispensable prerequisite to the reconstitution of a lo...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)