G.R. No.

186961

February 20, 2012

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. E ST SIL!ERL NE RE LT" #E!ELOP$ENT CORPOR TION, Respondent. DECISION RE"ES, J.: This Court is urged to review and set aside the July !, "##$ De%ision 1 and &e'ruary "#, "##( Resolution2 o) the Court o) *ppeals +C*, in C*-..R. C/ No. ##!0 . In its July !, "##$ De%ision, the C* a))ir1ed the *ugust "2, "##0 De%ision o) the Regional Trial Court +RTC,, 3ran%h 0# o) Cagayan De Oro City. The dispositive portion thereo) states4 56ERE&ORE, pre1ises )oregoing, the instant appeal is here'y DIS7ISSED )or la%8 o) 1erit. The assailed De%ision dated *ugust "2, "##0 is here'y *&&IR7ED in toto. SO ORDERED.3 In its &e'ruary "#, "##( Resolution, the C* denied the petitioner9s *ugust "(, "##$ 7otion )or Re%onsideration. 4 The &a%tual *nte%edents The respondent )iled with the RTC an appli%ation )or land registration, %overing a par%el o) land identi)ied as :ot (# ( o) Cagayan Cadastre, situated in El Salvador, 7isa1is Oriental and with an area o) (,2(0 s;uare 1eters. The respondent pur%hased the portion o) the su'<e%t property %onsisting o) 0,2#$ s;uare 1eters +*rea *, )ro1 &ran%is%a O%o pursuant to a Deed o) *'solute Sale dated Nove1'er "2, !((# and the re1aining portion %onsisting o) =,#$> s;uare 1eters +*rea 3, )ro1 Rosario ?. Tan :i1, Ne1esia Tan and 7ariano ?. Tan pursuant to a Deed o) Partial Partition with Deed o) *'solute Sale dated *pril !!, !((!. It was %lai1ed that the respondent9s prede%essors-ininterest had 'een in open, notorious, %ontinuous and e@%lusive possession o) the su'<e%t property sin%e June !", !(0=. *)ter hearing the sa1e on the 1erits, the RTC issued on *ugust "2, "##0 a De%ision, granting the respondent9s petition )or registration o) the land in ;uestion, thus4 *CCORDIN.:A, )inding the appli%ation 1eritorious, and pursuant to appli%a'le law and <urispruden%e on the 1atter, parti%ularly the provisions o) P.D. !="(, <udg1ent is here'y rendered granting the instant appli%ation. The :and Registration *uthority is here'y ordered to issue a de%ree in the na1e o) the appli%ant East Silverlane Realty Develop1ent Corporation %overing the par%el o) land, :ot (# (, Cad " 2, having an area o) (,2(0 s;uare 1eters %overed 'y the two +", ta@ de%larations su'<e%t o) this petition. 3ased on the de%ree, the Register o) Deeds )or the Provin%e o) 7isa1is Oriental is here'y dire%ted to issue an original %erti)i%ate o) title in the na1e o) the appli%ant %overing the land su'<e%t 1atter o) this appli%ation.5 On appeal 'y the petitioner, the C* a))ir1ed the RTC9s *ugust "2, "##0 De%ision. In its July !, "##$ De%ision, 6the C* )ound no 1erit in the petitioner9s appeal, holding that4 It is a settled rule that an appli%ation )or land registration 1ust %on)or1 to three re;uisites4 +!, the land is aliena'le pu'li% landB +", the appli%ant9s open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notorious possession and o%%upation thereo) 1ust 'e sin%e June !", !(0=, or earlierB and + , it is a 'ona )ide %lai1 o) ownership. In the %ase at 'en%h, petitioner-appellee has 1et all the re;uire1ents. *nent the )irst re;uire1ent, 'oth the report and %erti)i%ation issued 'y the Depart1ent o) Environ1ent and Natural Resour%es +DENR, shows that the su'<e%t land was within the aliena'le and disposa'le Cone %lassi)ied under 3& Pro<e%t DNEo. $ 3l8. I, :.C. 7ap DNEo. =$= and was released and %erti)ied as su%h on De%e1'er !, !("=. Indu'ita'ly, 'oth the DENR %erti)i%ation and report %onstitute a positive govern1ent a%t, an ad1inistrative a%tion, validly %lassi)ying the land in ;uestion. It is a settled rule that the %lassi)i%ation or re-%lassi)i%ation o) pu'li% lands into aliena'le or disposa'le, 1ineral or )orest land is now a prerogative o) the E@e%utive Depart1ent o) the govern1ent. *%%ordingly, the %erti)i%ation en<oys a presu1ption o) regularity in the a'sen%e o) %ontradi%tory eviden%e. *s it is, the said %erti)i%ation re1ains un%ontested and even oppositor-appellant Repu'li% itsel) did not present any eviden%e to re)ute the %ontents o) the said %erti)i%ation. Thus, the aliena'le and disposa'le %hara%ter o) the su'<e%t land %erti)ied as su%h as early as De%e1'er !, !("= has 'een %learly esta'lished 'y the eviden%e o) the petitioner-appellee. *nent the se%ond and third re;uire1ents, the appli%ant is re;uired to prove his open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and

notorious possession and o%%upation o) the su'<e%t land under a 'ona )ide %lai1 o) ownership either sin%e ti1e i11e1orial or sin%e June !", !(0=. @@@@ In the %ase at 'en%h, ESRDC ta%8ed its possession and o%%upation over the su'<e%t land to that o) its prede%essors-ininterest. Copies o) the ta@ de%larations and real property histori%al ownership pertaining thereto were presented in %ourt. * perusal o) the re%ords shows that in !(0$, a portion o) the su'<e%t land was de%lared under the na1e o) *gapito Claudel. Su'se;uently, in !(=2 until !((! the sa1e was de%lared under the na1e o) &ran%is%a O%o. Therea)ter, the sa1e was de%lared under the na1e o) ESRDC. * %erti)i%ation was li8ewise issued 'y the Provin%ial *ssessor o) 7isa1is Oriental that previous ta@ de%larations pertaining to the said portion under the na1e o) *gapita Claudel %ould no longer 'e lo%ated as the )iles were dee1ed lost or destroyed 'e)ore 5orld 5ar II. On the other hand, the re1aining portion o) the said land was previously de%lared in !(0$ under the na1e o) Ja%into Tan :ay Cho. Su'se;uently, in !(>( until !((#, the sa1e was de%lared under the na1e o) Ja%into Tan. Therea)ter, the sa1e was de%lared under the na1e o) ESRDC. * %erti)i%ation was li8ewise issued 'y the Provin%ial *ssessor that the )iles o) previous ta@ de%larations under the na1e o) Ja%into Tan :ay Cho were dee1ed lost or destroyed again 'e)ore 5orld 5ar II. In !((! or upon ESRDC9s a%;uisition o) the su'<e%t property, the latter too8 possession thereto. *l'eit it has presently leased the said land to *sia 3rewery, In%., where the latter 'uilt its 'rewery plant, nonetheless, ESRDC has its 'ran%h o))i%e lo%ated at the plant %o1pound o) *sia 3rewery, In%. Corollarily, oppositor-appellant9s %ontentions that the %ourt a ;uo erred in %onsidering the ta@ de%larations as eviden%e o) ESRDC9s possession o) the su'<e%t land as the latter9s prede%essors-in-interest de%lared the sa1e sporadi%ally, is untena'le. It is a settled rule that al'eit ta@ de%larations and realty ta@ pay1ent o) property are not %on%lusive eviden%e o) ownership, nevertheless, they are good indi%ia o) the possession in the %on%ept o) owner )or no one in his right 1ind would 'e paying ta@es )or a property that is not in his a%tual or at least %onstru%tive possession. They %onstitute at least proo) that the holder has a %lai1 o) title over the property. The voluntary de%laration o) a pie%e o) property )or ta@ation purposes 1ani)ests not only one9s sin%ere and honest desire to o'tain title to the property and announ%es his adverse %lai1 against the State and all other interested parties, 'ut also the intention to %ontri'ute needed revenues to the .overn1ent. Su%h an a%t strengthens one9s 'ona )ide %lai1 o) a%;uisition o) ownership. &inally, it 'ears stressing that the pie%es o) eviden%e su'1itted 'y petitioner-appellee are in%ontroverti'le. Not one, not even oppositor-appellant Repu'li%, presented any %ountervailing eviden%e to %ontradi%t the %lai1s o) the petitioners that they are in possession o) the su'<e%t property and their possession o) the sa1e is open, %ontinuous and e@%lusive in the %on%ept o) an owner )or over # years. /erily, )ro1 !(0$ when the su'<e%t land was de%lared )or ta@ation purposes until ESRDC )iled an appli%ation )or land registration in !((=, ESRDC have 'een in possession over the su'<e%t land in the %on%ept o) an owner ta%8ing its possession to that its prede%essors-in-interest )or )orty seven +02, years already. Thus, ESRDC was a'le to prove su))i%iently that it has 'een in possession o) the su'<e%t property )or 1ore than # years, whi%h possession is %hara%teriCed as open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive, and notorious in the %on%ept o) an owner. 7 +%itations o1itted, The petitioner assails the )oregoing, alleging that the respondent )ailed to prove that its prede%essors-in-interest possessed the su'<e%t property in the 1anner and )or the length o) ti1e re;uired under Se%tion 0$ +', o) Co11onwealth *%t No. !0!, otherwise 8nown as the FPu'li% :and *%tF +P:*,, and Se%tion !0 o) Presidential De%ree No. !="(, otherwise 8nown as the FProperty Registration De%reeF +P.D. No. !="(,. *%%ording to the petitioner, the respondent did not present a %redi'le and %o1petent witness to testi)y on the spe%i)i% a%ts o) ownership per)or1ed 'y its prede%essors-in-interest on the su'<e%t property. The respondent9s sole witness, /i%ente O%o, %an hardly 'e %onsidered a %redi'le and %o1petent witness as he is the respondent9s liaison o))i%er and he is not related in any way to the respondent9s prede%essors-in-interest. That %o%onut trees were planted on the su'<e%t property only shows %asual or o%%asional %ultivation and does not ;uali)y as possession under a %lai1 o) ownership. Issue This Court is %on)ronted with the sole issue o) whether the respondent has proven itsel) entitled to the 'ene)its o) the P:* and P.D. No. !="( on %on)ir1ation o) i1per)e%t or in%o1plete titles. Our Ruling

This Court resolves to .R*NT the petition. Preli1inarily, with respe%t to the in)ir1ity su))ered 'y this petition )ro1 the standpoint o) Rule 0=, this Court agrees with the respondent that the issue o) whether the respondent had presented su))i%ient proo) o) the re;uired possession under a 'ona )ide %lai1 o) ownership raises a ;uestion o) )a%t, %onsidering that it invites an evaluation o) the evidentiary re%ord.8 6owever, that a petition )or review should 'e %on)ined to ;uestions o) law and that this Court is not a trier o) )a%ts and 'ound 'y the )a%tual )indings o) the C* are not without e@%eptions. *1ong these e@%eptions, whi%h o'tain in this %ase, are4 +a, when the <udg1ent o) the C* is 'ased on a 1isapprehension o) )a%ts or +', when its )indings are not sustained 'y the eviden%e on re%ord. This Court9s review o) the re%ords o) this %ase reveals that the eviden%e su'1itted 'y the respondent )ell short o) proving that it has a%;uired an i1per)e%t title over the su'<e%t property under Se%tion 0$ +', o) the P:*. The respondent %annot register the su'<e%t property in its na1e on the 'asis o) either Se%tion !0 +!, or Se%tion !0 +", o) P.D. No. !="(. It was not esta'lished 'y the re;uired ;uantu1 o) eviden%e that the respondent and its prede%essors-ininterest had 'een in open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notorious possession o) the su'<e%t property )or the pres%ri'ed statutory period. The P:* governs the %lassi)i%ation and disposition o) lands o) the pu'li% do1ain. ?nder Se%tion !! thereo), one o) the 1odes o) disposing pu'li% lands suita'le )or agri%ultural purposes is 'y F%on)ir1ation o) i1per)e%t or in%o1plete titlesF.9 On the other hand, Se%tion 0$ provides the grant to the ;uali)ied possessor o) an aliena'le and disposa'le pu'li% land. Thus4 SEC. 0$. The )ollowing-des%ri'ed %itiCens o) the Philippines, o%%upying lands o) the pu'li% do1ain or %lai1ing to own any su%h lands or an interest therein, 'ut whose titles have not 'een per)e%ted or %o1pleted, 1ay apply to the Court o) &irst Instan%e o) the provin%e where the land is lo%ated )or %on)ir1ation o) their %lai1s and the issuan%e o) a %erti)i%ate o) title there)or, under the :and Registration *%t, to wit4 +a, Those who prior to the trans)er o) sovereignty )ro1 Spain to the ?nited States have applied )or the pur%hase, %o1position or other )or1 o) grant o) lands o) the pu'li% do1ain under the laws and royal de%rees then in )or%e and have instituted and prose%uted the pro%eedings in %onne%tion therewith, 'ut have with or without de)ault upon their part, or )or any other %ause, not re%eived title there)or, i) su%h appli%ants or grantees and their heirs have o%%upied and %ultivated said lands %ontinuously sin%e the )iling o) their appli%ations. +', Those who 'y the1selves or through their prede%essors in interest have 'een in open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive, and notorious possession and o%%upation o) agri%ultural lands o) the pu'li% do1ain, under a 'ona )ide %lai1 o) a%;uisition or ownership, )or at least thirty years i11ediately pre%eding the )iling o) the appli%ation )or %on)ir1ation o) title e@%ept when prevented 'y war or )or%e 1a<eure. These shall 'e %on%lusively presu1ed to have per)or1ed all the %onditions essential to a .overn1ent grant and shall 'e entitled to a %erti)i%ate o) title under the provisions o) this %hapter. +%, 7e1'ers o) the national %ultural 1inorities who 'y the1selves or through their prede%essors-in-interest have 'een in open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notorious possession and o%%upation o) lands o) the pu'li% do1ain suita'le to agri%ulture, whether disposa'le or not, under a 'ona )ide %lai1 o) ownership )or at least # years shall 'e entitled to the rights granted in su'-se%tion +', hereo). Presidential De%ree No. !#2 +P.D. No. !#2 ,, whi%h was issued on January "=, !(22, deleted su'se%tion +a, and a1ended su'se%tion +', as )ollows4 SECTION 0. The provisions o) Se%tion 0$ +', and Se%tion 0$ +%,, Chapter /III o) the Pu'li% :and *%t are here'y a1ended in the sense that these provisions shall apply only to aliena'le and disposa'le lands o) the pu'li% do1ain whi%h have 'een in open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notorious possession and o%%upation 'y the appli%ant thru hi1sel) or thru his prede%essor-in-interest under a 'ona )ide %lai1 o) ownership sin%e June !", !(0=. Nota'ly, the )irst P:*, or *%t No. (">, re;uired a possession and o%%upation )or a period o) ten +!#, years prior to the e))e%tivity o) *%t No. "#(> on July ">, !(#0 or on July ">, !$(0. This was adopted in the P:* until it was a1ended 'y Repu'li% *%t No. !(0" on June "", !(=2, whi%h provided )or a period o) thirty + #, years. It was only with the ena%t1ent o) P.D. No. !#2 on January "=, !(22 that it was re;uired that possession and o%%upation should %o11en%e on June !", !(0=. P.D. No. !="(, whi%h was ena%ted on June !!, !(2$, %odi)ied all the laws relative to the registration o) property.

Se%tion !0 thereo) partially provides4 Se%&'o( 1). 5ho 1ay apply. The )ollowing persons 1ay )ile in the proper Court o) &irst Instan%e an appli%ation )or registration o) title to land, whether personally or through their duly authoriCed representatives4 +!, Those who 'y the1selves or through their prede%essors-in-interest have 'een in open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notorious possession and o%%upation o) aliena'le and disposa'le lands o) the pu'li% do1ain under a 'ona )ide %lai1 o) ownership sin%e June !", !(0=, or earlier. +", Those who have a%;uired ownership o) private lands 'y pres%ription under the provision o) e@isting laws. + , Those who have a%;uired ownership o) private lands or a'andoned river 'eds 'y right o) a%%ession or a%%retion under the e@isting laws. +0, Those who have a%;uired ownership o) land in any other 1anner provided )or 'y law. Se%tion !0 +!, and Se%tion !0 +", are %learly di))erent. Se%tion !0 +!, %overs Faliena'le and disposa'le landF while Se%tion !0 +", %overs Fprivate propertyF. *s this Court %ategori%ally stated in 6eirs o) 7ala'anan v. Repu'li% o) the Philippines,10 the distin%tion 'etween the two provisions lies with the inappli%a'ility o) pres%ription to aliena'le and disposa'le lands. Spe%i)i%ally4 *t the sa1e ti1e, Se%tion !0 +", puts into operation the entire regi1e o) pres%ription under the Civil Code, a )a%t whi%h does not hold true with respe%t to Se%tion !0 +!,.11 Property is either part o) the pu'li% do1ain or privately owned. 12 ?nder *rti%le 0"# o) the Civil Code, the )ollowing properties are o) pu'li% do1inion4 +a, Those intended )or pu'li% use, su%h as roads, %anals, rivers, torrents, ports and 'ridges %onstru%ted 'y the State, 'an8s, shores, roadsteads and others o) si1ilar %hara%terB +', Those whi%h 'elong to the State, without 'eing )or pu'li% use, and are intended )or so1e pu'li% servi%e or )or the develop1ent o) the national wealth. *ll other properties o) the State, whi%h is not o) the %hara%ter 1entioned in *rti%le 0"# is patri1onial property,13hen%e, sus%epti'le to a%;uisitive pres%ription.14 In 6eirs o) 7ala'anan, this Court ruled that possession and o%%upation o) an aliena'le and disposa'le pu'li% land )or the periods provided under the Civil Code do not auto1ati%ally %onvert said property into private property or release it )ro1 the pu'li% do1ain. There 1ust 'e an e@press de%laration that the property is no longer intended )or pu'li% servi%e or develop1ent o) national wealth. 5ithout su%h e@press de%laration, the property, even i) %lassi)ied as aliena'le or disposa'le, re1ains property o) the State, and thus, 1ay not 'e a%;uired 'y pres%ription. Nonetheless, *rti%le 0"" o) the Civil Code states that FDpEroperty o) pu'li% do1inion, when no longer intended )or pu'li% use or )or pu'li% servi%e, shall )or1 part o) the patri1onial property o) the State.F It is this provision that %ontrols how pu'li% do1inion property 1ay 'e %onverted into patri1onial property sus%epti'le to a%;uisition 'y pres%ription. *)ter all, *rti%le 0"# +", 1a8es %lear that those property Fwhi%h 'elong to the State, without 'eing )or pu'li% use, and are intended )or so1e pu'li% servi%e or )or the develop1ent o) the national wealthF are pu'li% do1inion property. &or as long as the property 'elongs to the State, although already %lassi)ied as aliena'le or disposa'le, it re1ains property o) the pu'li% do1inion i) when it is Fintended )or so1e pu'li% servi%e or )or the develop1ent o) the national wealthF. +e1phasis supplied, %%or*'(+,y, &-ere .u/& be a( e01re// *e%,ara&'o( by &-e S&a&e &-a& &-e 1ub,'% *o.'('o( 1ro1er&y '/ (o ,o(+er '(&e(*e* 2or 1ub,'% /er3'%e or &-e *e3e,o1.e(& o2 &-e (a&'o(a, 4ea,&- or &-a& &-e 1ro1er&y -a/ bee( %o(3er&e* '(&o 1a&r'.o('a,. 5'&-ou& /u%- e01re// *e%,ara&'o(, &-e 1ro1er&y, e3e( '2 %,a//'2'e* a/ a,'e(ab,e or *'/1o/ab,e, re.a'(/ 1ro1er&y o2 &-e 1ub,'% *o.'('o(, 1ur/ua(& &o r&'%,e )20627, a(* &-u/ '(%a1ab,e o2 a%8u'/'&'o( by 1re/%r'1&'o(. I& '/ o(,y 4-e( /u%- a,'e(ab,e a(* *'/1o/ab,e ,a(*/ are e01re//,y *e%,are* by &-e S&a&e &o be (o ,o(+er '(&e(*e* 2or 1ub,'% /er3'%e or 2or &-e *e3e,o1.e(& o2 &-e (a&'o(a, 4ea,&- &-a& &-e 1er'o* o2 a%8u'/'&'3e 1re/%r'1&'o( %a( be+'( &o ru(. Su%- *e%,ara&'o( /-a,, be '( &-e 2or. o2 a ,a4 *u,y e(a%&e* by Co(+re// or a Pre/'*e(&'a, Pro%,a.a&'o( '( %a/e/ 4-ere &-e Pre/'*e(& '/ *u,y au&-or'9e* by ,a4. 15 In other words, )or one to invo8e the provisions o) Se%tion !0 +", and set up a%;uisitive pres%ription against the State, it is pri1ordial that the status o) the property as patri1onial 'e )irst esta'lished. &urther1ore, the period o) possession pre%eding the %lassi)i%ation o) the property as patri1onial %annot 'e %onsidered in deter1ining the %o1pletion o) the

pres%riptive period. To prove that its prede%essors-in-interest were in possession o) the su'<e%t property on or prior to June !", !(0= or had %o1pleted the pres%riptive period o) thirty + #, years, the respondent su'1itted the )ollowing ta@ de%larations4 a, Ta@ De%laration in the na1e o) *gapita Claudel )or the year !(0$B ', Ta@ De%larations in the na1e o) &ran%is%a O%o )or the years !(=2, !(> , !(>(, !(2 , !(20, !($#, !($2, !($( and !((!B %, Ta@ De%larations in the respondent9s na1e )or the years !((!, !((" and !((0B d, Ta@ De%larations in the na1e o) Ja%into Tan :ay Cho )or the years !(0$ and !(="B e, Ta@ De%larations in the na1e o) Ja%into Tan )or the years !(>(, !(2 , !(20, !($#, !($( and !((#B and ), Ta@ De%larations in the respondent9s na1e )or the years !((!, !((" and !((0. Pursuant to *gapita Claudel9s !(0$ Ta@ De%laration, there were nineteen +!(, %o%onut and ten +!#, 'anana trees planted on *rea *. The %o%onut trees were supposedly )our years old, hen%e, the reasona'le presu1ption that she had 'een in possession even 'e)ore June !", !(0=.16 The respondent also o))ered the )ollowing testi1ony o) /i%ente O%o4 FG H 7r. 5itness, I) you 8now a'out what period your prede%essor has started to possess this land su'<e%t 1atter o) this appli%ationI * H Per 1y personal 8nowledge, it was 'e)ore the se%ond world war 'ut the 7uni%ipality o) El Salvador was %reated on June !=, !(0$ 'y virtue o) R* ">$ and it9s started to o))i%ially )un%tion only on *ugust ", !(0$D.E G H &ro1 who1 did you a%;uire this in)or1ationI * H &ro1 the seller and the ad<oining lot owners.F17 To prove that its prede%essors-in-interest e@er%ised a%ts o) do1inion over the su'<e%t property, the respondent %lai1ed that per &ran%is%a O%o9s Ta@ De%larations, the )ollowing i1prove1ents were introdu%ed in *rea *4 nineteen +!(, %o%onut and ten +!#, 'anana trees in *rea * in !(=2 and !(> B thirty-three + , %o%onut trees in !(>( and !(2 B thirtythree + , %o%onut trees, one +!, 1ango tree and three + , seguidillas vines in !(20B thirty-three + , %o%onut trees in !($#B eighty-seven +$2, %o%onut trees in !($2B and )i)teen +!=, %o%onut trees in !($(. Per Ja%into Tan9s Ta@ De%larations, there were )i)ty-seven +=2, %o%onut trees in *rea 3 in !(2 , !(20, !($#, !($( and !((#. 18 * reading o) the C*9s July !, "##$ De%ision shows that it a))ir1ed the grant o) the respondent9s appli%ation given its supposed %o1plian%e with Se%tion !0 +", o) P.D. No. !="(. It ruled that 'ased on the eviden%e su'1itted, the respondent is not ;uali)ied to register the su'<e%t property in its na1e under Se%tion !0 +!, as the possession and o%%upation o) its prede%essors-in-interest %o11en%ed a)ter June !", !(0=. Nonetheless, as the C* ruled, the respondent a%;uired title to the su'<e%t property 'y pres%ription as its prede%essors-in-interest had possessed the su'<e%t property )or 1ore than thirty + #, years. Citing 3uenaventura v. Repu'li% o) the Philippines, 19 the C* held that even i) possession %o11en%ed a)ter June !", !(0=, registration is still possi'le under Se%tion !0 +", and possession in the %on%ept o) an owner e))e%tively %onverts an aliena'le and disposa'le pu'li% land into private property. This Court, however, disagrees on the %on%lusion arrived at 'y the C*. On the pre1ise that the appli%ation )or registration, whi%h was )iled in !((=, is 'ased on Se%tion !0 +",, it was not proven that the respondent and its prede%essors-in-interest had 'een in possession o) the su'<e%t property in the 1anner pres%ri'ed 'y law and )or the period ne%essary 'e)ore a%;uisitive pres%ription 1ay apply. 5hile the su'<e%t land was supposedly de%lared aliena'le and disposa'le on De%e1'er !, !("= per the *pril !$, !((2 Certi)i%ation and July !, !((2 Report o) the Co11unity Environ1ent and Natural Resour%es O))i%e +CENRO,,20 the Depart1ent o) *grarian Re)or1 +D*R, %onverted the sa1e )ro1 agri%ultural to industrial only on O%to'er !>, !((#.21 *lso, it was only in "### that the 7uni%ipality o) El Salvador passed a Joning Ordinan%e, in%luding the su'<e%t property in the industrial Cone. 22 There)ore, it was only in !((# that the su'<e%t property had 'een de%lared patri1onial and it is only then that the pres%riptive period 'egan to run. The respondent %annot 'ene)it )ro1 the alleged possession o) its prede%essors-in-interest 'e%ause prior to the withdrawal o) the su'<e%t property )ro1 the pu'li% do1ain, it 1ay not 'e a%;uired 'y pres%ription.

On the pre1ise that the appli%ation o) the respondent is predi%ated on Se%tion !0 +!,, the sa1e would li8ewise not prosper. *s shown 'y the ta@ de%larations o) the respondent9s prede%essors-in-interest, the earliest that the respondent %an tra%e 'a%8 the possession o) its prede%essors-in-interest is in !(0$. That there were )our-year old %o%onut trees in *rea * as stated in *gapita Claudel9s !(0$ Ta@ De%laration %annot 'e %onsidered a Fwell-nigh %ontroverti'le eviden%eF that she was in possession prior to June !", !(0= without any eviden%e that she planted and %ultivated the1. In the %ase o) Ja%into Tan :ay Cho, the earliest ta@ de%laration in his na1e is dated !(0$ and there is no eviden%e that he o%%upied and possessed *rea 3 on or prior to June !", !(0=. &urther1ore, the testi1ony o) the respondent9s lone witness that the respondent9s prede%essors-in-interest were already in possession o) the su'<e%t property as o) June !", !(0= la%8s pro'ative value )or 'eing hearsay. It is e@pli%it under Se%tion !0 +!, that the possession and o%%upation re;uired to a%;uire an i1per)e%t title over an aliena'le and disposa'le pu'li% land 1ust 'e Fopen, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notoriousF in %hara%ter. In Repu'li% o) the Philippines v. *l%ona'a,23 this Court e@plained that the intent 'ehind the use o) FpossessionF in %on<un%tion with Fo%%upationF is to e1phasiCe the need )or a%tual and not <ust %onstru%tive or )i%tional possession. The law spea8s o) possession and o%%upation. Sin%e these words are separated 'y the %on<un%tion and, the %lear intention o) the law is not to 1a8e one synony1ous with the other. Possession is 'roader than o%%upation 'e%ause it in%ludes %onstru%tive possession. 5hen, there)ore, the law adds the word o%%upation, it see8s to deli1it the all en%o1passing e))e%t o) %onstru%tive possession. Ta8en together with the words open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notorious, the word o%%upation serves to highlight the )a%t that )or an appli%ant to ;uali)y, his possession 1ust not 'e a 1ere )i%tion. *%tual possession o) a land %onsists in the 1ani)estation o) a%ts o) do1inion over it o) su%h a nature as a party would naturally e@er%ise over his own property.24 +%itations o1itted, On the other hand, Se%tion !0 +", is silent as to the re;uired nature o) possession and o%%upation, thus, re;uiring a re)eren%e to the relevant provisions o) the Civil Code on pres%ription. *nd under *rti%le !!!$ thereo), possession )or purposes o) pres%ription 1ust 'e Fin the %on%ept o) an owner, pu'li%, pea%e)ul and uninterruptedF. In 6eirs o) 7ar%elina *rCadon-Crisologo v. RaKon,25 this Court e@pounded on the nature o) possession re;uired )or purposes o) pres%ription4 It is %on%erned with lapse o) ti1e in the 1anner and under %onditions laid down 'y law, na1ely, that the possession should 'e in the %on%ept o) an owner, pu'li%, pea%e)ul, uninterrupted and adverse. Possession is open when it is patent, visi'le, apparent, notorious and not %landestine. It is %ontinuous when uninterrupted, un'ro8en and not inter1ittent or o%%asionalB e@%lusive when the adverse possessor %an show e@%lusive do1inion over the land and an appropriation o) it to his own use and 'ene)itB and notorious when it is so %onspi%uous that it is generally 8nown and tal8ed o) 'y the pu'li% or the people in the neigh'orhood. The party who asserts ownership 'y adverse possession 1ust prove the presen%e o) the essential ele1ents o) a%;uisitive pres%ription. 26 +%itations o1itted, This Court is not satis)ied with the eviden%e presented 'y the respondent to prove %o1plian%e with the possession re;uired either under Se%tion !0 +!, or Se%tion !0 +",. &irst, the twelve +!", Ta@ De%larations %overing *rea * and the eleven +!!, Ta@ De%larations %overing *rea 3 )or a %lai1ed possession o) 1ore than )orty-si@ +0>, years +!(0$-!((0, do not ;uali)y as %o1petent eviden%e o) a%tual possession and o%%upation. *s this Court ruled in 5ee v. Repu'li% o) the Philippines4 27 It 'ears stressing that petitioner presented only )ive ta@ de%larations +)or the years !(=2, !(>!, !(>2, !($# and !($=, )or a %lai1ed possession and o%%upation o) 1ore than 0= years +!(0=-!(( ,. This type o) inter1ittent and sporadi% assertion o) alleged ownership does not prove open, %ontinuous, e@%lusive and notorious possession and o%%upation. In any event, in the a'sen%e o) other %o1petent eviden%e, ta@ de%larations do not %on%lusively esta'lish either possession or de%larant9s right to registration o) title.28 +e1phasis supplied and %itation o1itted, The phrase Fadverse, %ontinuous, open, pu'li%, and in %on%ept o) owner,F 'y whi%h the respondent des%ri'es its possession and that o) its prede%essors-in-interest is a %on%lusion o) law. The 'urden o) proo) is on the respondent to prove 'y %lear, positive and %onvin%ing eviden%e that the alleged possession o) its prede%essors-in-interest was o) the nature and duration re;uired 'y law.29 It is there)ore in%onse;uential i) the petitioner )ailed to present eviden%e that would %ontrovert the allegations o) the respondent. * person who see8s the registration o) title to a pie%e o) land on the 'asis o) possession 'y hi1sel) and his prede%essors-in-interest 1ust prove his %lai1 'y %lear and %onvin%ing eviden%e, i.e., he 1ust prove his title and should not rely on the a'sen%e or wea8ness o) the eviden%e o) the oppositors.30 The respondent9s %lai1 o) ownership will not prosper on the 'asis o) the ta@ de%larations alone. In Ce;ueKa v.

3olante,31 this Court ruled that it is only when these ta@ de%larations are %oupled with proo) o) a%tual possession o) the property that they 1ay 'e%o1e the 'asis o) a %lai1 o) ownership. 32 In the a'sen%e o) a%tual pu'li% and adverse possession, the de%laration o) the land )or ta@ purposes does not prove ownership. 33 Se%ond, that the nineteen +!(, %o%onut trees supposedly )ound on *rea * were )our years old at the ti1e *gapita Claudel )iled a Ta@ De%laration in !(0$ will not su))i%e as eviden%e that her possession %o11en%ed prior to June !", !(0=, in the a'sen%e o) eviden%e that she planted and %ultivated the1. *lternatively, assu1ing that *gapita Claudel planted and 1aintained these trees, su%h %an only 'e %onsidered F%asual %ultivationF %onsidering the siCe o) *rea *. On the other hand, that Ja%into Tan :ay Cho possessed *rea 3 in the %on%ept o) an owner on or prior to June !", !(0= %annot 'e assu1ed )ro1 his !(0$ Ta@ De%laration. Third, that plants were on the su'<e%t property without any eviden%e that it was the respondent9s prede%essors-ininterest who planted the1 and that a%tual %ultivation or harvesting was 1ade does not %onstitute Fwell-nigh in%ontroverti'le eviden%eF o) a%tual possession and o%%upation. *s this Court ruled in 5ee4 5e are, there)ore, %onstrained to %on%lude that the 1ere e@isten%e o) an unspe%i)ied nu1'er o) %o))ee plants, sans any eviden%e as to who planted the1, when they were planted, whether %ultivation or harvesting was 1ade or what other a%ts o) o%%upation and ownership were underta8en, is not su))i%ient to de1onstrate petitioner9s right to the registration o) title in her )avor.34 &ourth, /i%ente O%o9s testi1ony deserves s%ant %onsideration and will not supple1ent the inherent inade;ua%y o) the ta@ de%larations. *part )ro1 'eing sel)-serving, it is undou'tedly hearsay. /i%ente O%o la%8s personal 8nowledge as to when the prede%essors-in-interest o) the respondent started to o%%upy the su'<e%t property and ad1itted that his testi1ony was 'ased on what he allegedly gathered )ro1 the respondent9s prede%essors-in-interest and the owners o) ad<oining lot. 7oreover, /i%ente O%o did not testi)y as to what spe%i)i% a%ts o) do1inion or ownership were per)or1ed 'y the respondent9s prede%essors-in-interest and i) indeed they did. 6e 1erely 1ade a general %lai1 that they %a1e into possession 'e)ore 5orld 5ar II, whi%h is a 1ere %on%lusion o) law and not )a%tual proo) o) possession, and there)ore unavailing and %annot su))i%e.35 Eviden%e o) this nature should have 'een re%eived with suspi%ion, i) not dis1issed as tenuous and unrelia'le.
!Lwphi!

&inally, that the respondent9s appli%ation was )iled a)ter only )our years )ro1 the ti1e the su'<e%t property 1ay 'e %onsidered patri1onial 'y reason o) the D*R9s O%to'er ">, !((# Order shows la%8 o) possession whether )or ordinary or e@traordinary pres%riptive period. The prin%iple enun%iated in 6eirs o) 7ala'anan %ited a'ove was reiterated and applied in Repu'li% o) the Philippines v. RiCalvo436 On this 'asis, respondent would have 'een eligi'le )or appli%ation )or registration 'e%ause his %lai1 o) ownership and possession over the su'<e%t property even e@%eeds thirty + #, years. 6owever, it is <urisprudentially %lear that the thirty + #,-year period o) pres%ription )or purposes o) a%;uiring ownership and registration o) pu'li% land under Se%tion !0 +", o) P.D. No. !="( only 'egins )ro1 the 1o1ent the State e@pressly de%lares that the pu'li% do1inion property is no longer intended )or pu'li% servi%e or the develop1ent o) the national wealth or that the property has 'een %onverted into patri1onial.37 56ERE&ORE, pre1ises %onsidered, the instant petition is .R*NTED. The July !, "##$ De%ision and &e'ruary "#, "##( Resolution o) the Court o) *ppeals in C*-..R. C/ No. ##!0 are RE/ERSED and SET *SIDE and the respondent9s appli%ation )or registration o) title over :ot (# ( o) Cagayan Cadastre is here'y DENIED )or la%8 o) 1erit. SO ORDERED. BIEN!ENI#O L. RE"ES *sso%iate Justi%e 5E CONC?R4 NTONIO T. C RPIO *sso%iate Justi%e $ RTIN S. !ILL R $ , :R.M :OSE PORTUG L PERE; *sso%iate Justi%e *sso%iate Justi%e $ RI LOUR#ES P. . SERENO *sso%iate Justi%e

*TT E ST*T I O N I attest that the %on%lusions in the a'ove De%ision had 'een rea%hed in %onsultation 'e)ore the %ase was assigned to the writer o) the opinion o) the Court9s Division. NTONIO T. C RPIO *sso%iate Justi%e Chairperson, Se%ond Division C E R T I & I C*T I O N Pursuant to Se%tion ! , *rti%le /III o) the Constitution and the Division ChairpersonNs *ttestation, I %erti)y that the %on%lusions in the a'ove De%ision had 'een rea%hed in %onsultation 'e)ore the %ase was assigned to the writer o) the opinion o) the Court9s Division. REN TO C. CORON Chie) Justi%e