G.R. No. 42338 ; October 30, 1936
PEDRO LACASTE, applicant-appellee, vs. THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, oppositor-appellant.

FACTS

Pedro Lacaste applied for registration of a parcel of land. The Director of Lands opposed, citing a free patent previously issued to Agustin Root over a portion of the same land. The evidence showed that the land was possessed and cultivated by Nicolas Lacaste (Pedro’s father) from 1883 until his death in 1927, after which Pedro continued possession. In 1895, Nicolas obtained a duly registered possessory information over the land and paid taxes from 1906. The Solicitor-General argued that the area in the possessory information (about 8+ hectares) differed significantly from the area applied for (about 41+ hectares), but the Court noted an error in the Solicitor-General’s calculation, finding the area in the possessory information for one parcel was actually 23+ hectares, making the discrepancy less substantial. It was also established that Root and another were tenants of Pedro Lacaste and had applied for homestead patents without his consent, leading to his opposition with the Bureau of Lands.

ISSUE

Whether the land had ceased to be part of the public domain and had become private property, thus making the free patent issued by the Director of Lands null and void.

RULING

Yes. The Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment. The long, continuous, and exclusive possession of the land by Nicolas Lacaste and later by Pedro Lacaste, supported by the possessory information and tax payments, converted the land into private property under established jurisprudence. Consequently, the Director of Lands had no authority to grant a free patent over it, rendering Free Patent No. 18007 issued to Agustin Root null and void. The registration of the land in favor of Pedro Lacaste and his sisters, as heirs of Nicolas Lacaste, was ordered.

AI Generated by Armztrong.