Title
Republic vs. Galeno
Case
G.R. No. 215009
Decision Date
Jan 23, 2017
A co-owner sought to correct a land title's area discrepancy, but the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, ruling that DENR certifications lacked probative value as hearsay without testimonial support.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 8750)

Facts:

  • Parties and Subject Matter
  • Petitioner: Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General.
  • Respondent: Carmen Santorio Galeno, co-owner of Lot No. 2285 under Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. 46417.
  • Subject: Petition for correction of the area of Lot No. 2285 in OCT No. 46417 from 20,948 square meters to 21,298 square meters.
  • Procedural History
  • September 2, 2003 – Respondent filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Dumangas, Iloilo, Branch 68, a petition for correction of title under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court, alleging a discrepancy between the title’s stated area (20,948 sqm) and the DENR’s certified area (21,298 sqm) following a resurvey for partition.
  • Ex parte proceedings – No opposition was filed; RTC allowed respondent to present evidence ex parte to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, including notice to adjoining owners.
  • October 13, 2006 – RTC issued an Order granting the petition, directing the Register of Deeds to correct the area in OCT No. 46417.
  • January 22, 2007 – RTC denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, finding that notices had been sent to adjoining owners.
  • Appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA) – CA, in a Decision dated June 27, 2013, affirmed the RTC Orders, and in a Resolution dated September 17, 2014, denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.
  • Present Petition – Petitioner filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court, assailing the CA’s decision and resolution.

Issues:

  • Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the correction of the land area of Lot No. 2285 in OCT No. 46417 from 20,948 sqm to 21,298 sqm, given the nature and sufficiency of the evidence presented by respondent.

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.