G.R. No. 27480 & 27481, December 31, 1927
MARTIN GONZALEZ, applicant-appellant, vs. PONCIANO MAURICIO, oppositor-appellant.

PONCIANO MAURICIO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. MARTIN GONZALEZ, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The controversy involves a 90-hectare land in Lubao, Pampanga. The land originally belonged to Pantaleon Diwa, who conveyed it to his stepson Benito Luneta Cruz in 1892. In December 1892, Diwa and Cruz sold the land under a pacto de retro to Jose R. Infante. Benito Luneta Cruz died in 1902 without redeeming the land. In 1906, Infante relinquished his rights to Mauricio Luneta Cruz (Benito’s son) for a partial payment, leaving a balance. Infante then filed a tax declaration in Mauricio’s name. Due to tax delinquency, the land was declared confiscated in 1911. In 1915, Mauricio Luneta Cruz offered to sell the land to Martin Gonzalez. Gonzalez paid the back taxes, repurchased the land from the government, and obtained a deed of conveyance from the heirs of Pantaleon Diwa. Mauricio Luneta Cruz also signed an affidavit transferring the property to Gonzalez for tax purposes.

In 1918, Gonzalez applied for land registration. Ponciano Mauricio (apparently a relative or claimant) later sought to intervene, alleging he acquired the land from the heirs of Benito Luneta Cruz through a deed (Exhibit H) executed in 1919 by the widow and children of Benito. This deed stipulated that the purchase price would only be paid if possession was recovered through litigation. Ponciano Mauricio also filed a separate civil action to recover possession of the land.

ISSUE

1. Whether Martin Gonzalez acquired valid title to the land through his purchase from Mauricio Luneta Cruz and subsequent transactions.
2. Whether Ponciano Mauricio acquired any superior right or title through the deed (Exhibit H) from the heirs of Benito Luneta Cruz.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of MARTIN GONZALEZ.

1. Gonzalez’s Title is Valid: The Court found that Mauricio Luneta Cruz had been in open, exclusive, and adverse possession of the land since at least 1906, acting as its owner. His possession, tacked to that of Gonzalez after the 1915 sale, gave Gonzalez title by prescription. The sale to Gonzalez was supported by consideration, and Gonzalez had made significant improvements to the land in good faith.

2. Ponciano Mauricio’s Claim Fails: The deed (Exhibit H) upon which Ponciano Mauricio relied was executed in 1919, *after* Gonzalez had already acquired the land. The Court found the testimony of Ponciano Mauricio’s witnesses (including some heirs) unreliable and noted the suspicious nature of the deed, which was essentially a contingent sale dependent on winning a lawsuit. The failure of key heirs to testify further weakened his claim. The Court concluded that the other heirs of Benito Luneta Cruz had long acquiesced to Mauricio Luneta Cruz’s exclusive ownership.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
The appealed judgment was REVERSED. The Supreme Court ordered:
1. The registration of the land (Lot No. 2, excluding specified sublots) in the name of Martin Gonzalez.
2. The dismissal of Civil Case No. 1895 (the recovery action filed by Ponciano Mauricio).
No costs were awarded.