GR 47900; (March, 1941) (Digest)
G.R. No. 47900 ; March 15, 1941
ANTONINO SALOMON, ET AL., applicants-appellees, vs. SEVERA BOCAUTO, ET AL., movants-appellants.
FACTS
On March 23, 1937, Antonino Salomon and others applied for the registration of a parcel of land in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan (Case No. 16256). The land was in the actual possession of Bonifacio Redon and Florencia Redon, who did not appear to contest the application despite notice. Policarpio Tamoro, in whose favor Bonifacio Redon had testified, filed an opposition. On January 26, 1939, the court rendered a decision overruling the opposition and adjudicating the land in favor of the applicants. Subsequently, Leoncio (Florencia) Redon, later joined by Severa Bocauto, filed a petition for review under section 38 of Act No. 496 . The lower court denied this petition on July 17, 1939, upon the applicants’ written objection. The petitioners (Bocauto and Redon) appealed this denial.
ISSUE
Whether the lower court correctly denied the petition for review filed by Severa Bocauto and Leoncio (Florencia) Redon under section 38 of Act No. 496 .
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court denying the petition for review. Under section 38 of Act No. 496 , a petitioner must affirmatively show: (1) an interest or estate in the land, and (2) deprivation of that interest through fraud in the procurement of the decree of registration. These essential facts must be clearly alleged in the petition; otherwise, the registration court is justified in dismissing it. In this case, the appellants (Bocauto and Redon) claimed an interest derived from Mariano Redon, the alleged original owner. However, the lower court, in its January 26, 1939 decision, had rejected this claim, finding instead that Mariano Redon had sold the land to Bonifacio Redon, who then conveyed it to Policarpio Tamoro. Furthermore, both petitioners had notice of the original registration proceedings but failed to assert any claim or show title in themselves at that time. Therefore, the petition for review was properly denied.