Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1913 > October 1913 Decisions > G.R. No. 8384 October 24, 1913 - FRANK W. TOWLE v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

025 Phil 637:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 8384. October 24, 1913. ]

FRANK W. TOWLE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Respondent-Appellee.

Bruce, Lawrence, Ross & Block for Appellant.

Attorney General Villamor for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. REGISTRATION OF LAND; TITLE UNDER ACT NO. 926. — An applicant for the registration of a title to agricultural lands may fall both under subdivision 6 of section 54 and under one of the other subdivision of that section in conjunction with section 65 of Act No. 926, and may be able to prosecute his proceeding under either subdivision at his election.

2. ID.; ID.; CLAIMANT’S RIGHT OF ELECTION. — Therefore, where the applicant for the registration of agricultural lands had, prior to the American occupation, begun a proceeding under Spanish law to obtain title thereto, and had, for the reasons expressed in any of the subdivisions of section 54, failed to obtain title and, therefore, might be required to make the payment specified in section 65, he may, nevertheless, if he has been in the open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of such lands under a bona fide claim of ownership for a period of ten years next preceding the taking effect of Act No. 926, renounce his rights under the other subdivisions of section 54 and stand upon the possession defined in subdivision 6, in which case he will not be required to make the payment provided for in section 65.


D E C I S I O N


MORELAND, J. :


This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Land Registration decreeing the registration of the title to the land described in the petition and ordering the petitioner, as a condition precedent to such registration, to pay P5 per hectare for the land so registered under section 65 of Act No. 926 of the Philippine Commission.

On the 23d of July, 1910, the appellant presented to the Court of Land Registration a petition asking for the registration of his title to certain lands situated in the municipality of Buena Vista, Province of Iloilo. The Government of the Philippine Islands, Raymundo Melliza, Rufino Mula, and Ciriaca Lacson responded to the petition and entered their opposition to the registration. Subsequently, and during the trial, Raymundo Melliza withdrew his opposition. The case having been tried, the court on the 12th of March, 1912, overruling the opposition of the respondents, decreed the registration of the title to the land in question, basing the judgment upon the ground that it had been clearly demonstrated by the evidence in the case that the petitioner and his predecessors in interest had been in open, peaceful, notorious and uninterrupted possession of the land in question for more than twenty years; that said land was agricultural land; and that, by reason of these facts, the case fell within the provisions of subdivision 6 of section 54 of Act No. 926. From the decision the Director of Lands took an appeal, which was subsequently withdrawn. None of the other respondents appealed.

On the 8th of July, 1912, the court, without notice to the appellant, made and entered what it termed "an additional decision," finding and holding that that portion of the land in question designated as parcel B was acquired by its original possessor under circumstances requiring payment therefor to the Government under the provisions of article 14 of the royal decree of January 26, 1889, and section 65 of Act 926 already referred to, and declaring that, as a condition precedent to the registration, the petitioner must pay P5 per hectare.

The original possessor of the greater part of the land in question was one Dimas Enriquez, who acquired part of it in the year 1889 and other parts in 1890 and 1891. The tract in question, parcel B, was acquired by occupation in 1891, it being at that time Government land. Enriquez sold the land to one Fitzgerald, who subsequently sold it to a Doctor Martin, who, in turn, conveyed it to the Appellant. These persons possessed and cultivated the land continuously, peacefully, openly, and notoriously for more than twenty years prior to the filing of the petition for registration.

The Government relies upon section 65 of Act No. 926 to sustain the amended judgment of the Court of Land Registration requiring the payment of P5 per hectare as a condition precedent to the registration of the title to the land. The appellant, on the other hand, relies upon the provisions of paragraph 6 of section 54 of the same Act.

We are of the opinion that section 65 is not applicable to this case as it is made up by the evidence before us. That section applies to a case where, under the Spanish regime, a proceeding was begun in accordance with the law then in force to obtain title to lands for which applicant must, before obtaining title, pay a sum specified by law. To bring the case necessarily within section 65, not only must such proceeding have been brought, but it must further appear that the proceeding thus begun, and the facts upon which it was based, constitute the only title or claim which petitioner has to the land sought to be registered under the section. Where, as in the case at bar, the petitioner for registration under Act No. 926 has a title or rights apart from and independent of the proceedings to obtain title above referred to, he may elect whether he will base his rights on the proceeding begun under the Spanish law, as provided in section 65, or whether he will abandon his rights under that proceeding and stand upon a title or rights which he has acquired in some other manner and which bring him within some other provision of the Act. In the case before us the petitioner comes within the provisions of Act No. 926 independently of the proceeding to obtain title begun under the Spanish regime. He comes within that Act by virtue of possession and cultivation of agricultural land for the required time, and not by virtue of any proceeding which he may have begun prior to the American occupation. while, possibly, he could have elected to stand upon the proceeding begun under the Spanish regime to obtain title to the land in question and thereby have brought himself under the provisions of section 65, he did not do so, but, on the contrary, elected to abandon the rights which he had obtained under that proceeding and to stand upon possession and cultivation. By so doing, he brought himself within paragraph 6 of section 54 of said Act No. 926. He had a perfect right to do this, and having done it, he obtained his registration not by virtue of section 65, but by virtue of paragraph 6 of section 54. That being the case, he was entitled to have his title registered without the payment of the P5 per hectare which the court imposed upon him.

The judgment of the Land Court is modified by striking out the provision for the payment of P5 per hectare, and, as so modified, is affirmed, without costs in this instance.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson, Carson and Trent, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






October-1913 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 7910 October 1, 1913 - NICOLAS MARIANO, ET AL. v. GREGORIO PURUGANAN, ET AL.

    025 Phil 385

  • G.R. No. 7959 October 2, 1913 - ALLISON D. GIBBS, ET AL. v. LUIS PEREZ SAMANILLO

    025 Phil 392

  • G.R. No. 8246 October 7, 1913 - TOMASA R. OSORIO v. ANGELA SAN AGUSTIN, ET AL.

    025 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. 8253 October 7, 1913 - E. M. BACHRACH v. EDWARD MANTEL

    025 Phil 410

  • G.R. Nos. 7257 and 7258 October 8, 1913 - LEONARDO LUCIDO, ET AL. v. ROMUALDO VITA

    025 Phil 414

  • G.R. No. 7476 October 9, 1913 - AGUEDA BENEDICTO DE LA RAMA v. ESTEBAN DE LA RAMA

    025 Phil 437

  • G.R. No. 8404 October 9, 1913 - AGUSTIN J. MONTILLA v. AUGUSTINIAN CORP.

    025 Phil 447

  • G.R. No. 7309 October 10, 1913 - MIGUEL BERSES, ET AL. v. MARIANO P. VILLANUEVA

    025 Phil 473

  • G.R. No. 8162 October 10, 1913 - FAUSTO ROSALES v. VICENTE REYES, ET AL.

    025 Phil 495

  • G.R. No. 8448 October 10, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. ANACLETO ALEGADO

    025 Phil 510

  • G.R. No. 8502 October 10, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. DOMINGO SAN JUAN

    025 Phil 513

  • G.R. Nos. 8892, 8893, 8899, 8900, 8901, 8902, 8903, 8904 & 8905 October 10, 1913 - JULIAN GALA v. MARIANO CUI

    025 Phil 522

  • G.R. No. 7638 October 14, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. RAMON BUNCAD

    025 Phil 530

  • G.R. No. 8321 October 14, 1913 - ALEJANDRA MINA, ET AL. v. RUPERTA PASCUAL, ET AL.

    025 Phil 540

  • G.R. No. 8326 October 14, 1913 - PAULA MALOLES v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    025 Phil 548

  • G.R. No. 8783 October 14, 1913 - MARCOS DE FIESTA, ET AL. v. JULIO LLORENTE, ET AL.

    025 Phil 554

  • G.R. No. 8429 October 16, 1913 - CITY OF MANILA v. EVARISTO BATLLE, ET AL.

    025 Phil 566

  • G.R. No. 8687 October 16, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. ANGEL BAGUIO, ET AL.

    025 Phil 575

  • G.R. No. 8726 October 17, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO DE LA CRUZ

    025 Phil 576

  • G.R. No. 8825 October 18, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. MARTIN ESCONDO

    025 Phil 579

  • G.R. No. 7663 October 20, 1913 - PEDRO MARTINEZ v. MATIAS CAVIVES, ET AL.

    025 Phil 581

  • G.R. No. 8193 October 22, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN LOPEZ

    025 Phil 589

  • G.R. No. 8528 October 22, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO FLORES, ET AL.

    025 Phil 595

  • G.R. No. 8634 October 22, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. JOSEPH N. HEERY

    025 Phil 600

  • G.R. No. 8799 October 22, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. FABIO SORIANO

    025 Phil 624

  • G.R. No. 8815 October 22, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS APIGO

    025 Phil 631

  • G.R. No. 8855 October 22, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. CORNELIA BALLESTEROS

    025 Phil 634

  • G.R. No. 8384 October 24, 1913 - FRANK W. TOWLE v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    025 Phil 637

  • G.R. No. 7019 October 29, 1913 - UNITED STATES v. PAZ JOSON, ET AL.

    026 Phil 1