G.R. No. 171631 ; November 15, 2010
Republic of the Philippines, Petitioner, vs. Avelino R. Dela Paz, Arsenio R. Dela Paz, Jose R. Dela Paz, and Glicerio R. Dela Paz, represented by Jose R. Dela Paz, Respondents.

FACTS

Respondents filed an application for original registration of title over a 25,825-square-meter parcel of land in Taguig, Metro Manila, under Presidential Decree No. 1529. They claimed ownership through a 1987 Salaysay ng Pagkakaloob from their parents, who allegedly inherited it from their deceased parent, Alejandro Dela Paz. Respondents asserted that they and their predecessors-in-interest had been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of the land in the concept of owners since time immemorial, or at least since June 12, 1945. They submitted various documents, including a survey plan annotated that the land was classified as alienable and disposable by the Bureau of Forest Development on January 3, 1968.
The Republic of the Philippines opposed the application, contending that respondents failed to prove the requisite possession and that the land remained part of the inalienable public domain. The Regional Trial Court granted the application, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The CA held that respondents successfully established possession through themselves and their predecessors and proved the land’s alienable status. The Republic elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the grant of respondents’ application for original registration of title.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition and reversed the lower courts’ decisions, thereby denying the application for registration. The legal logic is anchored on the stringent requirements for judicial confirmation of imperfect title under Section 14(1) of P.D. No. 1529. Applicants must conclusively prove: (a) that the land forms part of the alienable and disposable agricultural land of the public domain, and (b) that they, by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
The Court found respondents’ evidence fatally insufficient on both counts. First, to prove the land’s alienable and disposable character, the applicant must present a certification from the proper government agency that the land was classified as such, and a copy of the original classification approved by the DENR Secretary and proclaimed by the President. The annotation on the survey plan, indicating classification by the Bureau of Forest Development in 1968, is inadequate. It is not the certified true copy of the official declaration required by law and jurisprudence.
Second, respondents failed to prove the requisite possession since June 12, 1945. The earliest tax declaration presented was only from 1979. The Sinumpaang Pahayag (1979) and Salaysay ng Pagkakaloob (1987) are not instruments of title and do not conclusively establish possession prior to 1945. Mere assertions of possession since time immemorial, unsupported by clear and convincing evidence, cannot suffice. The period of possession could not be tacked to that of predecessors due to this evidentiary gap. Consequently, respondents did not overcome the presumption that the land remains part of the inalienable public domain.