Republic v Tri-plus

G.R. No. 150000, 503 SCRA 91

Facts:
On April 30, 1997 Tri-Plus Corporation filed with the MTC an Application for
Registration of Title over two parcels of land designated as Lots 1061 and 1062 of
the cadastral survey of Consolacion, Cebu and located at Barangay Tayud,
Consolacion. Tri-Plus alleged that it is the owner in fee simple of the subject parcels
of land, including the improvements thereon, having acquired the same through
purchase; and that it is in actual, continuous, public, notorious, exclusive and
peaceful possession of the subject properties in the concept of an owner for more
than 30 years, including that of its predecessors-in-interest.
The Republic opposed the application stating that the tax declarations and
receipts of tax payments, do not constitute competent and sufficient evidence of
a bona fide acquisition of the land applied for or of its open, continuous, exclusive
and notorious possession and occupation thereof in the concept of owner since June
12, 1945 or prior thereto; that the claim of ownership in fee simple on the basis of a
Spanish title or grant may no longer be availed of by the applicant because it failed
to file an appropriate application for registration in accordance with the provisions
P.D. No. 892; and that the subject parcels of land are portions of the public domain
belonging to the Republic of the Philippines and are not subject to private
appropriation.
The MTC and CA ruled in favor of the respondents. Petitioner contends that a
mere notation appearing in the survey plans of the disputed properties showing that
the subject lands had been classified as alienable and disposable on June 25, 1963
is not sufficient to establish the nature and character of these lands. Petitioner
asserts that there should be a positive act on the part of the government, such as a
certification from the DENR, to prove that the said lands are indeed alienable and
disposable. Petitioner further contends that even if the subject properties were
classified as alienable and disposable on June 25, 1963, the law, nonetheless,
requires that such classification should have been made on June 12, 1945 or earlier.
Issue: Whether or not the lands in question are alienable or disposable.
Held:
No. Section 6 of Commonwealth Act No. 141, as amended, provides that the
classification and reclassification of public lands into alienable or disposable,
mineral or forest land is the prerogative of the Executive Department. Under the
Regalian doctrine, which is embodied in our Constitution, all lands of the public
domain belong to the State, which is the source of any asserted right to any
ownership of land. All lands not appearing to be clearly within private ownership are
presumed to belong to the State. Accordingly, public lands not shown to have been
reclassified or released as alienable agricultural land or alienated to a private
person by the State remain part of the inalienable public domain.
In the present case, the only evidence to prove the character of the subject
lands as required by law is the notation appearing in the Advance Plan stating in
effect that the said properties are alienable and disposable. However, this is hardly
the kind of proof required by law. To prove that the land subject of an application for
registration is alienable, an applicant must establish the existence of a positive act

of the government such as a presidential proclamation or an executive order, an

administrative action, investigation reports of Bureau of Lands investigators, and a
legislative act or statute. The applicant may also secure a certification from the
Government that the lands applied for are alienable and disposable. In the case at
bar, while the Advance Plan bearing the notation was certified by the Lands
Management Services of the DENR, the certification refers only to the technical
correctness of the survey plotted in the said plan and has nothing to do whatsoever
with the nature and character of the property surveyed. Respondents failed to
submit a certification from the proper government agency to prove that the lands
subject for registration are indeed alienable and disposable.