Case Digest (G.R. No. 232778)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines v. Spouses Rolly D. Tan and Grace Tan, G.R. No. 232778, August 23, 2023, Supreme Court Third Division, Gaerlan, J., writing for the Court.On March 11, 2009 respondents filed an application for confirmation and registration of title over Lot No. 9192-A (later identified as Lot No. 9192-D), a 208-square-meter parcel in Barangay Gulod Labac, Batangas City. The application alleged acquisition from the heirs of Simeon and Cirilo (Cirilo) Garcia by way of extrajudicial settlements and absolute sales dated 2003–2004, attached the original tracing paper/approved subdivision plan, tax declarations and receipts, certifications from the City Assessor and City Treasurer showing assessed value and tax payments, and identified all adjoining owners.
During trial respondents testified to possession, occupation and tax payments; a neighbor, Felicidad Lumanglas, testified she had known the Garcias and that structures existed on the lot before respondents occupied it; the City Assessor’s witness testified tax declarations in the name of Simeon Garcia dated back to 1968; and CENRO-Batangas produced a March 24, 2011 investigator’s report and a March 28, 2011 certification by Forester I Loida Maglinao concluding the lot was “within the alienable and disposable zone under Project No. 13, Land Classification Map No. 718” (certified March 26, 1928) and noting no patent or title had been previously issued.
The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), Batangas City, granted the application in a Decision dated September 26, 2012, finding possession by respondents and their predecessors-in-interest for more than 40 years and accepting the CENRO reports and certification as evidence the land was alienable and disposable. The Office of the Solicitor General (petitioner) appealed. In a Decision dated October 26, 2016 the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No. 101418 affirmed the MTCC in toto, applying the Court’s reasoning in Republic v. Vega and finding the original tracing paper plus the two CENRO documents sufficient to prove alienability and disposability; the CA denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration on July 7, 2017.
Petitioner then filed this Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 assailing the CA rulings, principally arguing that (a) under Republic v. T.A.N. Properties a CENRO certification alone is insufficient and a certified true copy of the DENR Secretary’s original classification is required; (b) the CA misapplied Vega; and (c) respondents failed to prove the requisite possession and occupation. Respondents countered that the DENR did not exist in 1945, that an original 1928 land classification map already showed the area as alienable and disposable, and that they validly tacked possession.
While the case was pending, Congress enacted Republic Act No. 11573 (approved July 16, 2021) which amended provisions of the Public Land Act (CA No. 141) and PD No. 1529 and prescribed simplified proof of ali...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Whether R.A. No. 11573 and the Court’s decision in Republic v. Pasig Rizal Co., Inc. apply retroactively to this application pending as of September 1, 2021 and require remand for reception of additional evidence on land classification (procedural/jurisprudential question)?
- Whether respondents proved that (a) the subject land was alienable and disposable at the time of filing their application and (b) they and their predecessors-in-interest had the requisite possession and occupation to obtain confirmation of an imperfect title under...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)