G.R. No. 181812; June 8, 2011
FELICIANO GAITERO and NELIA GAITERO, Petitioners, vs. GENEROSO ALMERIA and TERESITA ALMERIA, Respondents.

FACTS

Following a cadastral survey in Barangay Ysulat, Tobias Fornier, Antique, a land registration court issued an original certificate of title to Rosario O. Tomagan covering a 10,741 square-meter land designated as Lot 9960. In 1993, Tomagan subdivided Lot 9960 into four lots: Lots 9960-A, 9960-B, 9960-C, and 9960-D. Tomagan waived her rights over Lots 9960-A and 9960-C in favor of petitioner Feliciano Gaitero and Lot 9960-B in favor of Barangay Ysulat, retaining Lot 9960-D for herself. Lot 9960-A, which went to Gaitero, adjoined Lot 9964, which belonged to respondent spouses Generoso and Teresita Almeria (the Almerias) and was covered by OCT P-14556. In June 2000, the Almerias commissioned a relocation survey and discovered that Gaitero had intruded into their lot by 737 sq m (the disputed area). On August 9, 2000, the Almerias waived their rights over a 158 sq m portion of the disputed area in Gaitero’s favor but maintained their claim over the remaining 579 sq m. Gaitero subsequently filed an affidavit of adverse claim on the Almerias’ title over the remaining 579 sq m. After failed barangay conciliation, Gaitero filed an action for recovery of possession against the Almerias before the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), claiming ownership of Lot 9960-A by inheritance and alleging that the cadastral survey erroneously lumped a portion of his lot with Lot 9960 in Tomagan’s name. The Almerias counterclaimed, asserting they bought Lot 9964 in 1985 and that Gaitero unlawfully encroached on their property. The MCTC dismissed Gaitero’s complaint, upholding the Almerias’ registered title. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) reversed, applying laches against the Almerias for asserting their right only after 15 years. The Court of Appeals (CA) reinstated the MCTC decision, holding that the Almerias’ registered title prevails and that laches did not apply.

ISSUE

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the Almerias are entitled to the possession of the disputed area as against Gaitero.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that possession is an essential attribute of ownership, and between the Almerias’ registered title of ownership and Gaitero’s verbal claim, the former’s title is far superior. The disputed area forms part of the Almerias’ registered title, as confirmed by the subdivision plan of Tomagan’s original Lot 9960. Since Gaitero failed to prove fraud in the titling, the Almerias’ right became indefeasible and incontrovertible. The Court further ruled that Gaitero’s action for recovery of possession constituted an impermissible collateral attack on a registered title, which cannot be impugned except in a direct proceeding permitted by law. Regarding laches, the Court held that it is a rule of equity and cannot vest ownership on Gaitero. Gaitero himself slept on his supposed right, as he had constructive, if not actual, notice of the registration of Lot 9964 in 1979 and the 1993 subdivision plan showing the disputed area outside Lot 9960-A, yet he did nothing to correct the alleged mistake. Thus, he is estopped from claiming ownership and cannot invoke equity.