G.R. No. 27818 , December 24, 1927
ROALES BROTHERS AND COUSINS, petitioners-appellants, vs. THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, opponent-appellant.

Ponente: Chief Justice Avanceña

FACTS

Roales Brothers and Cousins applied for the registration of several parcels of land constituting nearly all of Bonga Island in Cotabato. Their claim originated from Tomas Roales, who entered possession and began cultivating the island about ten years before the American occupation. Between 1893 and 1895, he obtained a grant for the entire island from the Military Political Commander of Illana Bay and formed an association called “Fortuna.” After Fortuna failed to pay land taxes, the island was sold at public auction to Francisco Diaz, from whom the appellants acquired the parcels.

The trial court granted registration for parcels 4, 6, 7, 8, and a portion of lot 2, finding actual occupation and cultivation by the applicants and their predecessors. However, it denied registration for the remaining portion of lot 2 and the entirety of lot 3, concluding that neither the applicants nor their predecessors had actual possession of these specific areas.

ISSUE

Whether the applicants’ actual possession and cultivation of a significant portion of Bonga Island constitute constructive possession of the entire island, including the portions not physically occupied (the remaining part of lot 2 and all of lot 3), thereby entitling them to registration under the law.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s denial of registration for the disputed portions. Applying the doctrine established in *Ramos vs. Director of Lands* (39 Phil. 175), the Court held that the peaceable, continuous, and notorious possession and cultivation of a substantial part of a tract of land, under a claim of ownership of the whole, constitutes constructive possession of the entire tract, provided no other party is in adverse possession of the remainder.

The evidence showed that the applicants and their predecessors had cultivated and were in actual possession of more than two-thirds of the island. These acts of possession over the majority of the property served as constructive possession of the whole, a claim further evidenced by the original grant obtained for the entire island. Additionally, there was evidence that the disputed areas had been used for pasturing cattle and cutting trees for boat construction.

Therefore, the registration of lots 2 and 3 in their entirety was ordered in favor of the applicants. The appealed judgment was modified accordingly.