G.R. No. 101690 August 23, 1995
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, SPOUSES FERNANDO DAYAO and REMEDIOS NICODEMUS, respondents.

FACTS

A fire destroyed the Office of the Register of Deeds of Bulacan. Subsequently, the private respondents, Spouses Dayao, filed a petition for judicial reconstitution of their Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-304198, alleging the original was among the burned documents. The trial court issued an order setting the petition for hearing and directing publication of the notice in the Official Gazette, posting, and service to various government offices. At the hearing, the private respondents submitted a Certification of Publication issued by the Director of the National Printing Office, which stated the order was published in the June 12 and June 19, 1989 issues of the Official Gazette. They did not submit the actual copies of the Gazette. The trial court granted the petition for reconstitution, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the order.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court acquired jurisdiction over the reconstitution proceedings despite the private respondents’ submission of only a Certification of Publication, and not the actual copies, of the Official Gazette to prove compliance with the publication requirement.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision, ruling that the trial court validly acquired jurisdiction. The Court held that a reconstitution proceeding is an action in rem, where jurisdictional requirements like publication aim to provide constructive notice to the whole world. The Certification of Publication issued by the National Printing Office, a government office, is competent evidence to prove the fact of publication. Official acts of public officers enjoy the presumption of regularity, which was not rebutted in this case. The Court further noted that the contents of the Official Gazette, being an official government publication, can be taken judicial notice of by the courts. The petitioner’s argument that actual copies of the Gazette must be presented as the “best evidence” was rejected. The certification sufficiently established that the notice was published in two successive issues, with the last issue released more than thirty days prior to the hearing, thus complying with Republic Act No. 26 . The Court also found no merit in the petitioner’s ancillary argument regarding non-compliance with LRC Circular No. 35, as the circular does not impose an obligation on the petitioner to show compliance by the Land Registration Commission or the Register of Deeds for the court to act on the petition.