G.R. No. 30242 - Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila vs. Fajardo

Parties, nature of action, and relief sought
The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila instituted an original action of replevin in the Court pursuant to Act No. 1376.
The action sought recovery from the defendants Alvara Fajardo and Eriberto Navarro of:

An image of Christ lying in the sepulcher, known popularly as Santo Entierro, Santo Sepulcro, Cristo Yacente, and also as Apung Macalulu; and
The carriage, or litter, in which it is conveyed in procession.

The defendants did not deny possession of the image and carriage.
Eriberto Navarro was not alleged to be the real person in interest; he acted as the agent of his aunt Alvara Fajardo, who asserted title adverse to the plaintiff.

Origin and religious history of the image and carriage
About eighty or a hundred years before the events giving rise to the case, Macario Paras, parish priest of Angeles, Pampanga, caused the image Apung Macalulu to be sculptured by the then well-known sculptor Buenaventura.
The image was initially installed in a little sanctuary built by Padre Paras on his own premises and became an object of veneration among nearby inhabitants.

Entries in church records and characterization as a gift to the church
The plaintiff proved an entry in the book of records of the Roman Catholic Church of Angeles showing that the image, with the carriage and other appendages, was treated as a gift to the church from Padre Paras (identified as Exhibit B) and placed in 1854.
The plaintiff also proved a similar entry in the church records dated February 20, 1865, stating that the image, with its adornment and carriage, was a gift from Padre Paras and that it was then in Padre Paras’s care.
Further proof showed that about 1872 the image, with its carriage, was transferred to the church, where it remained.

Transfer, temporary removal, and continued use in processions
The image and carriage remained in the church until about 1896 or 1897.
Owing to disturbed conditions of the country, the image and carriage were removed and carried to another municipality for safekeeping.
About 1904, they were taken back to the church.
Except when taken out on two occasions each year for solemn procession, the image remained in the church:

The forcible taking that triggered the replevin case
When the image was carried out in procession on Holy Friday of 1928, Eriberto Navarro, acting for his aunt Alvara Fajardo and with the assistance of numerous other persons allegedly acting in collusion with him, caused the image to be taken forcibly from the precincts of the church after the procession ended.
After the forcible removal, the image was carried to a place constructed for its deposit.
This act gave rise to the replevin action.

Defendants’ claim of title and its asserted basis
Alvara Fajardo’s claim of title was presented as originating from the following alleged chain of inheritance and transfer:

Padre Paras died about 1876, leaving a will instituting his nephew, Mariano V. Henson, as his universal heir.
It was supposed that Henson inherited the image from Padre Paras.
From Henson, the image purportedly passed by transfer to Fernanda Sanchez.
From Fernanda Sanchez, it purportedly passed to her son, Crispulo Bundoc, and then to his wife, the defendant Alvara Fajardo.
Crispulo Bundoc was now dead, leaving Alvara Fajardo as the only claimant by virtue of alleged title derived along this line.

The defendants’ theory was therefore that ownership derived from Padre Paras’s will and subsequent transfers, not ...(Subscriber-Only)

Whether the defendants, through Alvara Fajardo, held ownership of the image and carriage that could defeat the Archbishop’s replevin action
Whether Alvara Fajardo’s asserted chain of title from Padre Paras to Henson to Fernanda Sanchez to Crispulo Bundoc and to herself was proved.
Whether the evidence showing the image as a gift to the church, and the church’s long possession under that claim, established title in the Archbishop.

Whether the office of recamadera carried ownership of the image and carriage
Whether Alvara Fajardo’s right as recamadera included ownership of the image and carriage, or only duties and access related to religious care and collections.

Whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover the image and carriage in the replevin action
Whether t...(Subscriber-Only)