G.R. No. L-6365, March 18, 1911
CANUTA GUERRERO, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EULALIO SINGSON, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The trial court ruled in favor of plaintiff Canuta Guerrero, declaring her the owner of the land in dispute. The defendants, Eulalio Singson et al., appealed, arguing that the evidence did not support the judgment and that the trial court erred in conducting an on-site inspection of the property’s boundaries without formal objection from the parties during the proceedings.

ISSUE

1. Whether the evidence supports the trial court’s finding that plaintiff is the owner of the disputed land.
2. Whether the trial court committed reversible error by conducting an ocular inspection of the premises without prior objection from the parties.

RULING

1. Yes. The Supreme Court found that the evidence on record sufficiently supported the material allegations in the complaint and the trial court’s decision in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants’ claim of possession was not satisfactorily proven.
2. No. The Supreme Court held that since the defendants did not object to the ocular inspection during the trialeither by tacit assent or formal acquiescencethey are barred from raising the issue for the first time on appeal. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed, with costs against the appellants.