G.R. No. 259061 - Spouses Bangug vs. Dela Cruz

Petitioners: Spouses Salvador and Leonida M. Bangug, and Spouses Venerandy Adolfo and Jesusa Adolfo (collectively, petitioners). Respondent/plaintiff below: George dela Cruz (respondent/George).
Cause: Complaint for recovery of possession (accion publiciana) filed by respondent before the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), Ilagan City, Isabela, praying for possession of a 2,172 sq.m. parcel covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-388110 (Lot 1‑A), part of a larger parcel originally owned by Cayetana Guitang (about 8,657 sq.m. per origin OCT No. 3367/TCT No. T-120060).

Alleged chain: Cayetana died (sometime in 1935). In 1982 Severino dela Cruz (respondent George’s father) executed an Affidavit of Adjudication claiming to be “legitimate son and sole heir” of Cayetana; in December 1983 Severino executed a Deed of Reconveyance subdividing the parcel into five lots and showing himself “holding in trust” for various transferees (Lot 1‑A to George — 2,172 sq.m. — and other lots to Manuel, Juanito, Maria, and heirs of Rufina).
Petitioners’ possession: During Severino’s lifetime petitioners’ parents (Rufina and Juliana, both children of Cayetana) allowed petitioners to build/occupy portions of the property (houses, temporary storage). In 2011 respondent demanded that petitioners vacate; petitioners refused.

Respondent’s complaint: asserted registered ownership under TCT No. T-388110 and sought ejection of petitioners as unlawful possessors or tolerants.
Petitioners’ answer: denied exclusive ownership of Severino/George, alleged other heirs of Cayetana (seven children including Rufina and Juliana), asserted that Severino’s adjudication and the subsequent deed were invalid or infirm because he was not the sole heir, and claimed right to possess as co-heirs (but did not specifically file a direct action to cancel title; their counterclaim was limited to damages and defenses in the accion publiciana).

MTCC (Decision Oct 30, 2017): found respondent proved better right to possess; concluded petitioners’ occupation was by tolerance; ruled petitioners’ attack on title amounted to a collateral attack proscribed by PD 1529; directed defendants to vacate. MTCC conducted ocular inspection on August 14, 2015 and found the parcels occupied by petitioners were within respondent’s titled property; explained area discrepancies via subdivision plan and national road.
MTCC denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration (held plaintiffs’ ocular-inspection-supported evidence sufficient; issue of area discrepancies deemed waived by petitioners).
RTC (Decision Nov 19, 2019): affirmed MTCC — sustained that petitioners’ assertions challenged Torrens title by collateral attack and that respondent’s title showed a better right to possession.
Court of Appeals (CA) (Decision Nov 5, 2020; MR denied Feb 10, 2022): denied petitioners’ Rule 42 petition; held the “age-old rule” that the Torrens-title holder is entitled to possession and that petitioners’ way of attacking the title constituted a collateral attack barred by Section 48, PD 1529; instructed petitioners to pursue a direct action if they wished to annul or impugn the Torrens title.
Supreme Court docket: Petition for review under Rule 45 filed by petitioners (G.R. No. 259061); Decision promulgated Aug 15, 2022.

Whether petitioners have a better right of possession over the portions of the subject property they occupy (i.e., whether they are co‑owners with a right to possess that defeats respondent’s accion publiciana).

Whether a court hearing an accion publiciana may provisionally pass upon the issue of ownership when necessary to determine who has the better right to possess, without that adjudication constituting a prohibited collateral attack on a Torrens certificate under Section 48 of PD 1529.
Whether the Affidavit of Adjudication (1982) and the 1983 Deed of Reconveyance executed by Severino effectively and validly vested sole ownership in Severino (and his transferees) or whether the evidence supports a finding of co‑ownership among Cayetana’s heirs.