ChanRobles Virtual law Library

chanrobles.com - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT RESOLUTIONS - ON-LINE

cralaw_scresolutions_separator.NHAD

[G.R. No. 75805.October 25, 1999]

RAMONA BELTRAN vs. GATAN

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated OCT 25 1999.

G.R. No. 75805(Ramona Beltran, Eufrocina Beltran and Rafael Beltran vs. Court of Appeals, Maria, Alice, Merly, Romeo, Benito, Leslie and Grace, all surnamed GATAN.)

The case before the Court is an appeal via certiorari from the decision of the Intermediate Appellate Court 1 In AC-G.R. CV No. 05566, promulgated on April 9, 1986, Ejercito, J., ponente, Coquia, Zosa, and Bartolome, JJ. concurring.affirming in all respects the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Isabela, Branch 22, Cabagan. 2 In Civil Case No. 54, dated October 1, 1984.

The facts as narrated by the trial court and adopted in toto by the appellate court are as follows:

"x x x, the lot in question, consisting of 1,332 square meters, more or less, bounded on the North by Lot 571; on the Southeast by Lot 569; on the Southwest by Road; on the Northeast by Lot 570; and on the Northwest, by Lot 566, is owned in common by the Heirs of Mariano Gatan. This is so stated in Original Certificate of Title No. P-21300, issued pursuant to Free Patent No. 439863 dated April 18, 1969, and registered with the Office of the Register of Deeds for the Province of Isabela.

"x x x Mariano Gatan died in 1945 in Cabagan, Isabela. His wife, Hermogena Aggabao, died in 1966 also in Cabagan, Isabela. They are survived by the following children and grandchildren who now constitute the Heirs of Mariano Gatan, thus - Rita Gatan, defendant; Maria Gatan, plaintiff; Serapio Gatan, deceased, but survived by his children, namely Romeo, Benito, Leslie, Merly, Alice and Grace, all surnamed Gatan, plaintiffs who executed a Special power of Attorney in favor of plaintiff Maria Gatan to represent them in this case; Alfonsa Gatan, Pura Gatan and Esperanza Gatan.Alfonsa Gatan and Pura Gatan waived their rights over the lot in question in favor of plaintiff Maria Gatan (Exhibit 'C').Esperanza Gatan is already dead but her children sold their rights or share over the lot in question to plaintiff Maria Gatan (Exhibit 'D').Being co-owners, plaintiffs have the right to demand the partition of the property after defendants refused to have it partitioned extrajudicially.

"Defendants claim that they are the owners of the land in question. They claim that they inherited the same from Ramon Beltran, deceased husband of Rita Gatan and father of Ramona Beltran. They impugn the validity of Original Certificate of Title No. P-21300, claiming that plaintiff Maria Gatan and Third-party defendant Esteban Arugay, now deceased, cheated them by placing Heirs of Mariano Gatan, represented by. Ramona Beltran, in the title and application for free patent. They pray for the cancellation of the title or re-conveyance thereof to them. Alleging substantially the same allegations as in their answer, defendants filed a third-party complaint against plaintiff Maria Gatan and Esteban Arugay, now deceased.

"Defendants attack and impugn the validity of the title in their answer to the complaint for partition in this case."

x��������� x��������� x

"Defendants filed a third-party complaint against the plaintiff Maria Gatan and Esteban Arugay alleging, as stated, that the latter cheated them. They pray for the nullity of the title. They also pray for the re-conveyance of the land in question." 3 Decision, Intermediate Appellate Court, Rollo, pp. 22-31, at pp. 23-24.

On February 12, 1973, respondents, as plaintiffs below, filed a complaint with the Court of First Instance of Isabela for partition of the above-described parcel of land. In their answer, petitioners, as defendants therein, claimed that they were the owners of the land in question, having inherited the same from Ramon Beltran and Rita Gatan. Respondents cheated them by placing heirs of Mariano Gatan as the owners in the title and application for free patent. Petitioners prayed for nullification of the title and re-conveyance of the land to them.

After trial on the merits, on October 1, 1984, the trial court rendered decision in favor of plaintiffs, the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:

"WHEREFORE, the Court hereby renders judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants and orders:

"1. The partition of the property in question in accordance with Article 980 of the New Civil Code;

"2. The defendants to pay to the plaintiffs P500.00 as attorney's fees; and

"3. The defendants to pay the costs.

"SO ORDERED."

On appeal to the Intermediate Appellate Court, on April 9, 1986, the appellate court rendered decision affirming the appealed decision in all respects, with costs against appellants. 4 Ibid .

On May 3, 1986, defendants-appellants filed a motion for reconsideration, however, on August 18, 1986, the appellate court denied the motion for lack of merit.

Hence, this appeal. 5 Petition, Rollo, pp. 5-21.

On October 13, 1986, the Court resolved to require the respondents to comment on the petition within ten (10) days from notice. 6 Rollo , p. 33.

On November 27, 1986, respondents filed their comment. 7 Rollo , pp. 42-48.

On March 6, 1987, petitioners filed a reply. 8 Rollo , pp. 51-59.

On May 25, 1987, the Court gave due course to the petition, required petitioners to deposit the costs and clerk's commission, and both parties to submit their respective briefs within thirty (30) days from notice. 9 Rollo , p. 60.

In due time, the parties filed their respective briefs. 10 The case was originally assigned to Justice, later Chief Justice Pedro L. Yap. It was re-raffled to this ponente on August 10, 1999.

At issue is who are the lawful owners of the parcel land in question, the petitioners who were in possession and had filed a free patent application over the same, or respondents who are heirs of the registered owners under Original Certificate of Title No. P-21300 of the Register of Deeds of Isabela in the name of "Heirs of Mariano Gatan by Ramona Gatan."

As aforesaid, both the appellate and the trial court held that the torrens title can not be the subject of a collateral attack. And assuming any irregularity in the issuance of the title, it is the State which should ask for reversion of the land to the public domain.

Petitioners claim ownership of the land in question through longtime possession. They contend that the fraudulent registration of the land in the name of respondents created an implied trust for their benefit. On the other hand, respondents themselves also claim ownership of the land as heirs of the titled owners, which is why they filed an action for partition. They deny that petitioners were in exclusive possession of the land. On the question of fraud, petitioners failed to prove fraud. In an action for re-conveyance based on fraud, he who charges fraud must prove such fraud in obtaining a title. "In this jurisdiction, fraud is never presumed. 11 Cosiquien vs. Court of Appeals, 188 SCRA 619, 626 [1990], citing Benitez vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, 154 SCRA 41 [1987].

We find the question raised to be factual, hence, not reviewable in this appeal. 12 De la Cruz vs. Court of Appeals, 265 SCRA 299, 307 [1996], citing Gobonseng, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, 246 SCRA 472 [1995]; Pantranco vs. Keirulf vs. Court of Appeals, 269 SCRA 433, 442 [1997]; Sarao vs. Court of Appeals 278 SCRA 247, 252 [1997].

Consequently, we see no reversible error in the decision a quo.

WHEREFORE, the Court hereby DENIES the petition for review on certiorari of the decision of the Intermediate Appellate Court in AC-G. R. CV No. 05566, dated April 9, 1986, and AFFIRMS the same in toto.

No costs.

PUNO, J., is on official leave.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO
Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

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