G.R. No. 10072; November 29, 1916
WILLIAM ABRAHAM KINCAID, petitioner-appellee, vs. CAYETANO CABUTUTAN, ET AL., objectors-appellants.

FACTS:
On September 28, 1911, William Abraham Kincaid filed an application with the Court of Land Registration for the registration of a tract of land in Tubao, La Union, containing approximately 5,738,952 square meters (about 573 hectares). He claimed ownership through a conveyance from Feliciano de la Rose in 1909 and alleged the land was free from encumbrances, though occupied by 336 persons. The Director of Lands opposed the application, asserting the land was public domain. Additionally, 124 private objectors, represented by various counsel, filed adverse claims, asserting ownership of specific parcels within the larger tract through inheritance or purchase, alleging possession ranging from thirty to sixty years. After trial, the Court of Land Registration, in a judgment dated September 13, 1913, denied all adverse claims and decreed the registration of the land in favor of Kincaid, with exceptions for a parcel previously registered for school purposes and a strip occupied by a highway. The court also ordered Kincaid to pay for a surplus area. Several objectors appealed.

ISSUE:
Whether the Court of Land Registration erred in decreeing the registration of the land in favor of William Abraham Kincaid and denying the adverse claims of the numerous objectors.

RULING:
The Supreme Court modified the judgment of the lower court. It held that Kincaid’s application for registration could only be granted with respect to the portion of land for which no valid adverse claim was proven. The Court meticulously reviewed the evidence and found that a significant portion of the land applied for was rightfully claimed and possessed by numerous objectors who had proven their ownership through long and continuous possession (ranging from thirty to sixty years) under a claim of title. The Court also recognized exclusions based on stipulations between the parties and prior registrations.

Consequently, the Supreme Court ordered the exclusion from Kincaid’s application of the following:
1. Specific parcels held by certain individuals (e.g., Santiago Betia, the Ballejo brothers, the Orencia brothers) as per stipulation or relinquishment.
2. The aggregate area of parcels held by 97 objectors who had proven their rights, totaling approximately 315 hectares.
3. The parcel previously registered for school purposes.
4. The strip of land forming the Tubao-Rosario Highway.
5. The parcel of objector Basilio Aspillaga.

The Court adjudicated and ordered the registration in favor of Kincaid only the remaining balance of approximately 233 hectares, for which no one had come forward with a proven adverse claim. The claims of nine objectors who failed to present satisfactory proof of their rights were denied. The appealed judgment was affirmed insofar as it agreed with this disposition and reversed in other parts. No costs were awarded.