SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

G.R. No. L-3155 January 22, 1908
JOHN BORDMAN vs. INSULAR GOVERNMENT, ET AL. -->

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-3155 January 22, 1908

JOHN BORDMAN, petitioner-appellee, vs. THE INSULAR GOVERNMENT, ET AL., respondents-appellants.

Attorney-General Araneta, for appellant.
John Bordman, in his own behalf.

WILLARD, J. :chanrobles virtual law library

This case comes from the Court of Land Registration. The Attorney-General appeared therein and objected to the granting of the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that the property in question belonged to the Government. Judgment was rendered for the petitioner and the Government has appealed.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The court below held that the petitioner had acquired title to the land in controversy as against the Government by prescription. This ruling was erroneous. (Valenton vs. Murciano, 3 Phil. Rep., 537; Cancino vs. Valdez, 3 Phil. Rep., 429; Tiglao vs. The Insular Government, 7 Phil. Rep., 80; Cariño vs. The Insular Government, 7 Phil. Rep., 132.) chanrobles virtual law library

The court below found as a fact that the petitioner and his grantors had been in quiet, public, and uninterrupted possession as owners of the land in question since 1887. The Attorney-General makes no claim in his brief in this court to the effect that such possession was not the possession required by Act. No. 926, section 54, paragraph 6, and an examination of the evidence shows that the case is brought fully within the provisions of that section. The Attorney-General, however, claims that the appellee, not having asked in his petition for the benefits of the Public Land Act ( No. 926), is not entitled to have his land registered by virtue of the provisions of such act. This claim has been made by the Attorney-General in other cases and has been disallowed. (Order of Dominicans vs. The Insular Government, 7 Phil. Rep., 98; Pamintuan vs. The Insular Government, 8 Phil. Rep., 485; Alvarez vs. The Insular Government, No. 3784, decided January 16, 1908. ¹ ) chanrobles virtual law library

The judgment of the court below is affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the appellants. So ordered.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Carson and Tracey, JJ., concur.

---

Endnotes:

¹ Page 608, supra.