G.R. No. 1801 : July 26, 1905

FACTS:
Gregorio Broce died on August 16, 1898. A dispute arose over the ownership of the Hacienda San Pedro in Calatrava, Occidental Negros. The plaintiffs, who are Gregorio’s children, claimed ownership of the property. The defendant, Catalino Broce (Gregorio’s brother), also claimed ownership. The plaintiffs filed an action to establish their title. The court of first instance ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, declaring them the owners. The defendant appealed, arguing that the evidence did not justify the trial court’s finding of fact.

ISSUE:
Did the evidence presented during the trial sufficiently justify the trial court’s finding of fact that the plaintiffs are the true owners of the Hacienda San Pedro?

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court.

The Court held that the question presented was purely one of the weight of evidence. After examining the record, the Court found that the evidence clearly preponderated in favor of the plaintiffs’ claim of ownership. The Court specifically adopted the trial court’s reasoning, which gave decisive weight to the certificate of registration (inscription in the Property Registry) issued in the names of the plaintiffs on December 1, 1890. This registration was based on a possessory information (información posesoria) that was itself promoted and filed by the defendant, Catalino Broce. In that judicial proceeding, Catalino explicitly stated that upon the death of his brother Gregorio, the hacienda belonged pro-indiviso to Gregorio’s named children (the plaintiffs), as Gregorio had acquired it by purchase and possessed it peacefully since 1880.

The Supreme Court found that the defendant’s explanations at trial for why he filed the possessory information in the plaintiffs’ names were unsupported by the evidence. Other evidence in the record also corroborated the plaintiffs’ claim. Therefore, the trial court’s factual finding was upheld, and its judgment was affirmed. Costs were taxed against the appellant.