GR L 23300; (October, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-23300 October 31, 1967
ANDRES MANARPAAC, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. ROSALINO CABANATAN, THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS and THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF ILOCOS NORTE, in his capacity as such, defendants-appellees.
FACTS
The plaintiffs, surnamed Manarpaac, filed an action alleging they have been, since time immemorial, in actual possession as owners of two parcels of land in Batac, Ilocos Norte, with tax declarations in their names and houses built on the land. They claimed that in 1956, defendant Rosalino Cabanatan, through fraud and without notice to them, included these parcels in his application for a free patent over an agricultural public land. A free patent was issued to Cabanatan on November 7, 1959, and a certificate of title was issued on December 3, 1959. The plaintiffs sought to have the patent and title declared null and void, or, alternatively, for reconveyance of the lands. The defendants asserted the regularity of the patent issuance and argued the plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies. The lower court dismissed the complaint, holding that the action, filed on December 7, 1960, was filed more than one year after the patent’s issuance on November 3, 1959, and was thus barred.
ISSUE
Whether the lower court erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action was filed beyond the one-year period for review of the decree.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court set aside the order of dismissal and remanded the case. The complaint’s averments of possession since time immemorial, tax declarations, and ownership through fraud are sufficient to state a cause of action. Possession since time immemorial raises the presumption that the land was never part of the public domain but was private property. Whether this presumption holds is a question of fact to be determined after trial. Following the doctrine in Susi v. Razon, such possession by operation of law constitutes a grant from the state, making the land private and beyond the Director of Lands’ control. The remedy of a landowner whose property is wrongfully registered in another’s name, after one year from the decree, is not to set aside the decree but to bring an ordinary action for reconveyance. The complaint, deemed as one for reconveyance based on the defendant’s admission in his answer, states a sufficient cause of action for recovery of possession.