G.R. No. L-9227; February 10, 1915
LUIS VERZOSA Y SALVATIERRA, petitioner-appellant, vs. PETRONA NICOLAS, objector-appellant, and BALDOMERO GUIEB, objector-appellee.

FACTS:
Luis Verzosa y Salvatierra filed an application for the registration of 26 parcels of land in Solsona, Ilocos Norte, alleging ownership by purchase from Vicenta Gutierrez y Tomas. Two opponents contested portions of the land: Petrona Nicolas claimed a homestead right over part of parcel No. 24, while Baldomero Guieb claimed ownership of lots 25-A and 26-A, portions of parcels 25 and 26. Guieb asserted that these lots were part of his inheritance, separated from his main property when the Arasaas River changed its course in 1910. The Court of Land Registration granted registration to Verzosa for most parcels but denied it for lots 25-A and 26-A, awarding them to Guieb. Verzosa appealed this denial. Petrona Nicolas also appealed, but her appeal was dismissed for being filed out of time.

ISSUE:
Whether lots 25-A and 26-A are owned by Luis Verzosa (and thus registrable in his name) or by Baldomero Guieb.

RULING:
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Land Registration, holding that lots 25-A and 26-A belong to Baldomero Guieb and are not registrable in favor of Luis Verzosa.

The Court found that Verzosa failed to provide conclusive proof that these specific lots were included in his purchase from Vicenta Gutierrez. In contrast, Guieb presented credible evidenceincluding testimony from witnesses familiar with the landthat he had inherited and continuously possessed the lots since 1877, cultivated them until an inundation in 1904, and resumed cultivation afterward. The Court accepted Guieb’s account that the Arasaas River’s change in course had segregated these lots from his main property. As the applicant for registration, Verzosa bore the burden of proving ownership, which he did not meet for the disputed lots. The opposition of Petrona Nicolas was deemed already settled in a prior unrelated case (Nicolas vs. Verzosa, G.R. No. 8146 ). Costs were assessed against Verzosa.