GR 48202; (November, 1942) (Digest)
G.R. No. 48202 , November 28, 1942
THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, petitioner-appellant, vs. ELEUTERIO ABORDO, ET AL., claimants. MARIA MANTILLA DE ORTIZ, claimant-appellee; SOFIA ROBLES DE BERNARTE, claimant-appellant.
FACTS
This is a cadastral land registration case. Claimant-appellee Maria Mantilla de Ortiz based her claim on an acquisition of rights over the lots from a certain “S,” which transfer was approved by the Bureau of Lands. She subsequently possessed the property and paid the balance of the purchase price. However, no patent or certificate of title had been issued to her by the government at the time of the proceedings.
ISSUE
Whether the court, in cadastral proceedings, can confirm and register title to the lots in favor of claimant-appellee based on her inchoate rights arising from an approved transfer and partial payment, absent the issuance of a government patent or certificate of title.
RULING
NO. The court reversed the decision granting registration to the appellee.
1. Court’s Role is Confirmatory, Not Constitutive: It is a settled rule that in cadastral or any land registration proceeding, the court cannot confer a new title. Its function is limited to confirming a title already vested and existing, to render it indefeasible.
2. Appellee’s Rights are Merely Inchoate: The appellee’s acquisition of rights, the Bureau of Lands’ approval of the transfer, her possession, and her payment of the balance conferred upon her only an expectancy or an inchoate right to own the lots. Title does not vest in her until the government patent or certificate of title is duly issued. Since she laid no claim to such a patent, there was no vested title in her that the court could confirm. Consequently, the lots in question remain part of the public domain.
3. Exclusive Authority of the Bureau of Lands: Under Sections 4 and 5 of Commonwealth Act No. 141 , the Bureau of Lands, subject to the control of the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce, has “direct executive control of . . . sale or any other form of concession or disposition and management of the public domain.” This conferred authority is exclusive. The court cannot, through its official functions, deprive the Bureau of Lands of this control, just as it cannot divest the state of its title and confer it upon another.