G.R. No. 120066 . September 9, 1999.
OCTABELA ALBA Vda. De RAZ, Spouses MANUEL and SUSANA BRAULIO, RODOLFO, LOURDES and BEATRIZ all surnamed ALBA, petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and JOSE LACHICA, respondents.

FACTS

Applicant Jose Lachica filed an application for land registration on April 28, 1958, claiming ownership of a 4,845-square-meter residential lot in Banga, Aklan, purchased from Eulalio Raz. The initial hearing was set for October 31, 1958, with proper publication and posting. An order of general default was issued, but oppositors were allowed to file written opposition. The oppositions were: (1) Spouses Manuel and Susana Braulio, claiming ownership of a 240-square-meter southeastern portion; (2) Octabela Alba Vda. de Raz, initially opposing, later amending her opposition to claim a 331.44-square-meter southeastern portion and a 676-square-meter western portion; (3) Jose Rago, representing Apolonia Rebeco, opposing a 43.83-square-meter northeastern portion (his opposition was later withdrawn); and (4) Rodolfo, Lourdes, and Beatriz Alba, claiming co-ownership of a 2,262-square-meter portion inherited from their father. The trial court appointed a commissioner to delimit the claimed portions. The Braulios failed to present sufficient evidence of possession. Octabela Alba Vda. de Raz’s testimonies were stricken off the record for non-appearance. The trial court granted Lachica’s application, dismissing all oppositions. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s decision granting Jose Lachica’s application for land registration and dismissing the oppositions.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the petitioners failed to prove that the land was private property or that they and their predecessors-in-interest had been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of the land under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier, as required for confirmation of imperfect title under the Public Land Act and Property Registration Decree. The evidence presented by the petitioners, primarily tax declarations, was insufficient to overcome the presumption that the land remained part of the public domain. In contrast, respondent Jose Lachica, through his predecessor-in-interest Eulalio Raz, established a registrable title by proving possession since 1918, supported by credible testimonial evidence and tax payments. The withdrawal of Jose Rago’s opposition and the failure of the Braulios to substantiate their claim further weakened the petitioners’ case. The trial court’s factual findings, affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are entitled to great weight and respect.