GR 220868; (June, 2020) (Digest)
G.R. No. 220868 , June 15, 2020
Republic of the Philippines, Petitioner, vs. Spouses Reynaldo Dela Cruz and Loretto U. Dela Cruz, Respondents.
FACTS
The case stemmed from a petition for application for land registration covering Lot 7001, Cad. 450 filed by the spouses Reynaldo and Loretto dela Cruz (respondents). They claimed the land formed part of the alienable and disposable land of the public domain and that they had been in open, public, notorious, and continuous possession for more than 34 years. They bought the land in 1981 from Flordeliza Delos Reyes, who testified she inherited it from her parents and occupied it since the 1960s. Respondents presented witnesses who knew them as buyers and a Special Investigator from the DENR-CENRO who maintained the land was alienable and disposable. The petitioner Republic did not present countervailing evidence. The Municipal Trial Court (MTC) granted the application, finding compliance with Section 14(1) of Presidential Decree No. 1529. The Court of Appeals affirmed the MTC decision. The petitioner argued on appeal that the application fell under Section 14(2) of P.D. No. 1529, requiring a government manifestation that the land is patrimonial. Respondents filed a motion to withdraw their application, citing legal expenses and the tedious process, but the CA proceeded to deny the appeal.
ISSUE
Whether or not the registration of the subject land is proper.
RULING
No, the registration of the subject land is not proper. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals Decision and Resolution and denied the application for registration. The Court held that the respondents failed to prove the alienable and disposable character of the land as required by law. For registration under either Section 14(1) or Section 14(2) of P.D. No. 1529, the applicant must prove the land is alienable and disposable land of the public domain. This requires a positive act from the Executive Department. The evidence submitted by the respondents—testimony of a CENRO Special Investigator, a CENRO Report dated December 31, 1925, a Survey Plan, and a Technical Description—was insufficient. Following Republic v. T.A.N. Properties, Inc., the applicant must present a copy of the original classification approved by the DENR Secretary and certified as a true copy by the legal custodian. A mere CENRO certification is inadequate to overcome the presumption of State ownership under the Regalian Doctrine. The burden of proof rests on the applicant and is not shifted by the government’s failure to present evidence. The respondents’ failure to establish this indispensable element warranted the denial of their application.