G.R. No. L-29792 and L-29866, August 31, 1970
Arsenio Dela Cruz, Pedro Sangabol, and Lucia Gutierrez, Petitioners, v. Potenciano Reano and the Hon. Florendo P. Aquino, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija, Respondents. / Francisco Juan, Hermogenes Juan, Celestino Juan, Eufemia Juan, Victoria Juan, Felimon Juan, Claudia Juan and Marcelo Juan, Petitioners, v. Potenciano Reano and the Hon. Florendo P. Aquino, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija, Respondents.

FACTS

In G.R. No. L-29792, Homestead Patent No. V-21853 was issued on July 28, 1954, leading to the issuance of Original Certificate of Title No. P-1870 on August 18, 1956, in the name of Simeon Gutierrez, covering Lots 1, 2, and 3 (corresponding to Cadastral Lots 1896, 1914, and 1913 of Sta. Rosa, Nueva Ecija). These lots were subsequently acquired by petitioners Arsenio dela Cruz, Pedro Sangabol, and Lucia Gutierrez, who obtained transfer certificates of title. On May 16, 1966, respondent Potenciano Reano filed a “Petition for Continuation of Cadastral Proceedings” in Cadastral Case No. 67, seeking to lift the order of general default and have the lots adjudicated to him. On November 16, 1966, the lower court rendered judgment adjudicating Lots 1896, 1913, and 1914 to Reano, and later issued a writ of possession in his favor. Petitioners learned of this only upon service of the writ and moved to set it aside, but their motion and subsequent motion for reconsideration were denied by respondent Judge Florendo P. Aquino.
In G.R. No. L-29866, Homestead Patent No. D-995 was issued, leading to Original Certificate of Title No. P-275 on July 24, 1948, in the name of Mariano Juan, covering Cadastral Lot No. 1863. Upon Mariano Juan’s death, his children (the petitioners) succeeded him. On the same date, May 16, 1966, Reano filed a similar petition in Cadastral Case No. 67, and on November 16, 1966, the court adjudicated Lot 1863 to him. A writ of possession was subsequently issued. Petitioners moved to set aside the writ, but their motion and motion for reconsideration were likewise denied by respondent Judge Aquino.

ISSUE

Whether the writs of certiorari are proper remedies to annul the writs of possession and the orders of the lower court, given that the lands in question were already covered by homestead patents and original certificates of title issued to the petitioners’ predecessors in interest prior to Reano’s cadastral petition.

RULING

Yes, the writs of certiorari are granted. The Supreme Court held that the judgment adjudicating the lots to Reano, the subsequent decree of registration, and the certificates of title issued in his name are null and void. The Court reasoned that once a homestead patent is issued and the corresponding original certificate of title is granted, the land ceases to be part of the public domain and becomes private property. Consequently, the cadastral court no longer has jurisdiction to decree registration of the same land in a subsequent proceeding. The second decree for the same land is null and void. Furthermore, the petitioners and their predecessors had been in possession as homesteaders and absolute owners for more than ten years before Reano’s application, thereby acquiring title by prescription. Since Reano’s titles were void, he had no right to the writs of possession. The Court set aside the writs of possession issued in Cadastral Case No. 67 concerning Lots 1896, 1914, 1913, and 1863.