Case Summary (G.R. No. 73465)
Factual Background
Private respondents alleged that the late Francisco Gerardo and his successor Domingo Gerardo had been in open, peaceful and continuous possession of a parcel in Barangay Casibarag-Cajel, Cabagan, Isabela, described as their “motherland,” containing approximately 2.5000 hectares, and that an accretion of about three to three and one-half hectares resulted from the northward movement of the Cagayan River. The heirs purportedly sold the motherland to respondent Domingo Apostol, and Apostol thereafter declared the parcel and its accretion for taxation under Tax Declaration No. 08-13281 on September 15, 1982. Petitioners rested their claim on an Original Certificate of Title No. P-19093, dated November 25, 1968 in the name of their predecessor-in-interest Antonio Carniyan, issued pursuant to Free Patent No. 399431 dated May 21, 1968, which described the northern boundary of the registered lot as the Cagayan River.
Trial Proceedings and Relief Sought
On November 12, 1982 the trial court issued a temporary restraining order. The application for a writ of preliminary injunction was denied on July 28, 1983 on the ground that defendants were in actual possession prior to September 1982. The trial court, however, rendered judgment on July 6, 1984 declaring Domingo Apostol absolute owner of the subject land, issuing and making permanent a writ of preliminary injunction against petitioners, and awarding attorney’s fees of P5,000.00 and litigation expenses of P1,500.00. Petitioners appealed to the Intermediate Appellate Court on July 17, 1984, which affirmed the trial court on October 15, 1985.
Issues Presented
Petitioners assigned four errors: (A) that the courts erred in ruling the accretion belonged to private respondents when petitioners’ Original Certificate of Title No. P-19093 states the northern boundary as the Cagayan River; (B) that the courts erred in construing tax declarations against petitioners when those declarations could not have been executed by the deceased predecessor of respondents; (C) that the courts wrongly ruled petitioners were never in possession despite evidence of possession; and (D) that the courts erred in awarding the accretion to private respondents who claimed the accretion occurred only in 1982.
Parties’ Contentions
Petitioners contended that their registered title was conclusive and entitled them to the accretion as riparian owners, that prior tax declarations were not evidence to overcome the indefeasibility of their Torrens title, and that evidence established their possession of the accretion prior to 1982. Private respondents contended that their motherland and its accretion had been in their family since before July 26, 1894, relied on tax declarations in the name of Francisco Gerardo, recitals of an extra-judicial partition and reconveyance, and the subsequent written sale to Domingo Apostol.
Trial Court and Appellate Findings
The trial court found that respondent Domingo Apostol, through predecessors-in-interest, had acquired an imperfect title and declared him absolute owner of the subject land. The trial court relied on testimony it found credible, including pedigree testimony of private respondent Soledad Gerardo, and concluded petitioners had not been in possession of the subject land. The Intermediate Appellate Court affirmed those findings, treating certain tax declarations as admissions and upholding the trial court’s conclusions.
Supreme Court’s Ruling
The Supreme Court granted the petition. The decision of the Intermediate Appellate Court was reversed and set aside. The judgment of the trial court in Civil Case No. Br. III-373 for quieting of title and damages was dismissed. Costs were imposed against private respondents. The decision was rendered by a Division with Narvasa (Chairman), Cruz, Gancayco, and Grino-Aquino, JJ., concurring.
Legal Basis and Reasoning
The Court held that declarations of ownership for tax assessment are not sufficient proof of ownership and that an Original Certificate of Title No. P-19093 in favor of petitioners’ predecessor carried greater weight than tax declarations offered by private respondents, citing precedent including Ferrer-Lopez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 50420, May 29, 1987. The Court emphasized that a decree of registration bars claims and rights which arose prior to registration, subject to the exceptions in Section 39, Act No. 496 (now Section 44, PD No. 1529). The Court found that subsequent tax declarations by Antonio Carniyan reflected the northern boundary as the Cagayan River and thus repudiated any earlier acknowledgment to the contrary. The Court also concluded that the evidence showed petitioners’ possession of the accretion: the trial court’s denial of a preliminary injunction recognized defendants’ prior possession; testimony of a bounda
...continue reading
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 73465)
Parties and Procedural Posture
- LEONIDA CUREG, ROMEO, PEPITO, HERNANDO, MANUEL, ANTONIO AND ELPIDIO (ALL SURNAMED CARNIYAN), PETITIONERS are the defendants in the underlying quieting of title action and appellants in the Intermediate Appellate Court decision attacked by this petition under Rule 45.
- DOMINGO APOSTOL, SOLEDAD GERARDO, ROSA GERARDO, NIEVES GERARDO, FLORDELIZA GERARDO, AND LILIA MAQUINAD, RESPONDENTS are the plaintiffs in the underlying action who sued for quieting of title and damages with a preliminary injunction.
- The private respondents filed the complaint on November 5, 1982, and the trial court issued a temporary restraining order on November 12, 1982.
- The trial court denied the writ of preliminary injunction on July 28, 1983, but later, in a decision dated July 6, 1984, declared Domingo Apostol absolute owner and granted a permanent injunction and monetary awards.
- The Intermediate Appellate Court affirmed the trial court decision on October 15, 1985, and denied a motion for reconsideration on January 8, 1986.
- Petitioners brought the present petition for review under Rule 45 seeking reversal of the appellate decision and dismissal of Civil Case No. Br. III-373 for quieting of title and damages.
Key Factual Allegations
- The private respondents asserted ownership of a 2.5000-hectare parcel called the "motherland" allegedly held by their predecessors since before July 26, 1894, supported mainly by tax declarations in the name of their alleged predecessor Francisco Gerardo.
- The private respondents alleged that accretion of about three to three and one-half hectares formed north of the motherland due to northward movement of the Cagayan River and that Domingo Apostol acquired the motherland and its accretion by verbal sale in 1979 and by an extrajudicial partition with reconveyance executed September 10, 1982.
- The petitioners relied on Original Certificate of Title No. P-19093, issued November 25, 1968 to their predecessor Antonio Carniyan, which shows the northern boundary of the registered lot as the Cagayan River and which was issued pursuant to Free Patent No. 399431 dated May 21, 1968.
- Petitioners produced an Absolute Deed of Sale dated October 5, 1956 showing that Antonio Carniyan bought the registered land from Marcos Cureg with the northern boundary described as the Cagayan River.
- The record includes tax declarations purporting to be in the name of Francisco Gerardo, but the trial established that Francisco Gerardo died long before World War II.
- A Bureau of Lands order dated August 14, 1980 concerning a homestead application of Democrata Aguila found that the accretion area was occupied and cultivated by, among others, Antonio Carniyan, and did not list any of the private respondents or their predecessors as occupants.
Issues Presented
- Whether the appellate court erred in ruling that the subject accretion belonged to the private respondents and not to the petitioners when petitioners' Original Certificate of Title No. P-19093 described the northern boundary as the Cagayan River.
- Whether the appellate court erred in construing tax declarations against the interest of the petitioners when the alleged predecessor of the private respondents could not have executed postwar tax declarations because he died long before World War II.
- Whether the appellate court erred in finding that the petitioners had never