G.R. No. 191867 , December 06, 2021
AMLASON ENDE and QUEZON ENDE, SURVIVING CHILDREN AND LEGITIMATE HEIRS OF SPOUSES BUTAS ENDE AND DAMAGI AROG, represented by their co-heir, Attorney-In-Fact, LETECIA ENDE-BACALSO, Petitioners, vs. ROMAN CATHOLIC PRELATE OF THE PRELATURE NULLIUS OF COTABATO, INC., FR. RONILO VILLAMOR and/or JOSE RABANG, WELHILMINA VDA. DE GENERALLA, JESUS ACOSTA, ELIZA DIAZ, and/or JUANITO DIAZ and FLORENTINO KINTANAR, both represented by FELIPE VINLUAN, SR., PRIMO BAGASMAS and JESSIE FLORES and/or CORAZON FLORES, Respondents.

FACTS

Spouses Butas Ende and Damagi Arog, Manobo natives, were the registered owners of a 223,877-square meter lot in Kidapawan, Cotabato, covered by Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. P-46114. Portions of this property were occupied by respondents: Roman Catholic Prelate (11,356 sqm), Welhilmina Vda. de Generalla (112,023 sqm), Eliza and Juanito Diaz (26,457 sqm), and Jessie and Corazon Flores (12,500 sqm). On August 17, 1995, Amado Ende, Daniel Ende Ano, Felipe Mendoza, and Pilar Sunga, claiming to be the surviving heirs of the spouses Ende, filed a complaint for quieting of title and recovery of possession with damages. They alleged respondents took possession through deceitful machinations targeting the illiterate spouses, and that conveyances to respondents were not annotated on the OCT. Respondents moved to dismiss, citing defective barangay certification and certificate of non-forum shopping. An amended complaint was filed to rectify the verification and certification. Respondents, in their answer, claimed they acquired their portions from Damagi or from third persons who acquired from her, asserted ownership via tax declarations due to registration difficulties, and invoked acquisitive prescription and laches. On January 9, 1996, petitioners Amlayon Ende and Quezon Ende, claiming to be the actual surviving children and legitimate heirs of the spouses Ende, intervened. They asserted that the original plaintiffs were impostors, that they (the petitioners) were driven from the property by relatives, and that the original plaintiffs were not the real parties-in-interest, seeking nullity of the extrajudicial settlement and dismissal of the complaint.

ISSUE

The primary issue is the determination of the rightful heirs of spouses Butas Ende and Damagi Arog and the validity of the respondents’ claims to portions of the property covered by OCT No. P-46114.

RULING

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) dismissed the complaint filed by Amado Ende, et al., finding they failed to prove their case by preponderance of evidence. However, the RTC granted the intervention of petitioners Amlayon Ende and Quezon Ende, finding they successfully proved they are the children and legitimate heirs of the spouses Ende. The RTC declared the conveyances to respondents (except to Welhilmina Vda. de Generalla) null and void for being fictitious. Regarding Welhilmina, the RTC found she acquired a portion from Damagi on April 5, 1945, but her lawful acquisition was limited to Damagi’s conjugal share, reducing her entitled area to 7.4625 hectares. The RTC ordered all other respondents to vacate their occupied portions and deliver possession to petitioners Amlayon and Quezon. The rights to improvements on the property for respondents in bad faith (and for Welhilmina regarding the excess area) were to be governed by Articles 545 to 548 of the Civil Code. The Court of Appeals later dismissed both the complaint and the answer-in-intervention, a decision which was ultimately challenged in this petition to the Supreme Court.