G.R. No. 233821 , June 14, 2021
LOLITA JAVIER AND JOVITO CERNA, PETITIONERS, VS. DIRECTOR OF LANDS, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

On August 20, 1971, the Director of Lands filed a petition for the adjudication of title to a 2,540.5667-hectare land designated as Lupon Cadastre. On June 25, 1974, petitioners Lolita Javier and Jovito Cerna filed their Answers asserting ownership over portions, specifically Lot No. 3541. On January 28, 2005, petitioners filed a Motion to Set Case for Hearing, alleging no hearing had been set for their claims. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) set the hearing. At the hearing, the Provincial Prosecutor appeared for the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). Javier testified that their father donated the lot to them via a 1974 Donation Inter Vivos and they had occupied and cultivated it. The RTC admitted their evidence and later, after submission of an approved subdivision survey, issued a Judgment on March 8, 2010, adjudicating Lot No. 3541 to petitioners. The OSG filed a Motion for Reconsideration, alleging denial of due process, which the RTC denied, noting the OSG was furnished copies and its representative participated. On March 26, 2013, the OSG filed an Appeal, questioning the RTC’s jurisdiction for the first time, alleging failure to prove publication of the Notice of Initial Hearing and possession. The Court of Appeals (CA) granted the appeal on May 31, 2017, holding the RTC lacked jurisdiction due to failure to prove publication compliance, and dismissed the case. The CA denied reconsideration.

ISSUE

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in finding that the trial court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the cadastral case for failure of petitioners to show proof of publication of the Notice of Initial Hearing.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the Petition and REINSTATED the RTC Judgment. The Court held that the respondent, through the OSG, was estopped by laches from raising the issue of lack of jurisdiction for the first time on appeal after 42 years from the filing of the petition and only after the RTC ruled against it twice. The OSG actively participated in the proceedings through the Provincial Prosecutor, was furnished all pleadings and orders, and never raised the jurisdictional issue during the lengthy proceedings. The duty to ensure publication lies with the government, which initiated the cadastral proceedings. Allowing the government to belatedly assail jurisdiction after such a long time and multiple participations would be unjust and condone its negligence. Thus, estoppel by laches had set in.