Padayao v. Villafuerte, Jr. [January 15, 2025]

By •

G.R. No. 260415 – PUNONG BARANGAY DANTE PADAYAO, petitioner, vs. GOV. LUIS RAYMUND F. VILLAFUERTE, JR., ATTY. JANIS IAN REGASPI-CLEOFE, JOSE FRANCISCO L. MUSA, JR., LUIS ZULUETA, JOVIE VILLAREAL, DONDON OBIAS and THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF CAMARINES SUR, as well as every other individual and/or individuals, whether claiming, using and/or exercising rights under them, respondents.

INTING, J.

Rule Synopsis

The issuance of a patent title under Commonwealth Act (CA) No. 141 requires that the applicant has continuously occupied and cultivated, either by themselves or their predecessors-in-interest, the subject land. Absent evidence to the contrary, the Court may presume that a free patent was issued in compliance with the requirement for occupation and cultivation.

Absent contrary proof, a land classification map is reliable proof that a parcel of land has been classified as alienable and disposable (A&D).

Facts

Located in Pitogo Island are the subject properties, Lot Nos. 6972 and 6973 covered by Katibayan ng Orihinal na Titulo (KOT) 35669 issued in the name of the heirs of Mario Padayao (Mario) covering 74k+ sqm.

In January 2009, the provincial government of Camarines Sur wrote the residents of Pitogo Island ordering them to vacate the same as it is considered a protected area and is part of the danger zone. After a warning, armed men demolished the structures in the Island, including that of Punong Barangay Dante Padayao’s (Dante). Dante’s asserts better right over Lot Nos. 6972 and 6973.

Dante to filed a Complaint for recovery of possession and damages with application for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction against the provincial government and officers involved in the demolition.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted Dante’s prayer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction, which the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed with modification. The CA found that Dante had better right of possession only as to Lot No. 6973 but not as to Lot No. 6972. Both parties moved for reconsideration which were denied by the CA.

Hence, the instant petition.

Issue

Did the CA err in ruling that Dante has a better right of possession only with respect to Lot No. 6973?

Ruling and Discussion

Note: the SC ruled that the RTC retains jurisdiction over the case even though the same is properly cognizable by the MTC given the respondents’ failure to raise the issue of jurisdiction and their active participation in the case.

Yes. The CA erred in ruling that Dante has a better right of possession only with respect to Lot No. 6973. Dante presented sufficient proof that he is entitled to possession of both Lot Nos. 6972 and 6973.

Note: the action filed by Dante is accion publiciana which seeks to determine who has the better right of possession.

Dante has a better right of possession over Lot No. 6973

  • Lot No. 6973 is titled under KOT Blg. 35669, a patent title.
  • Dante was able to prove that he has continuously occupied and cultivated, by himself and his predecessors-in-interest, the subject land as required under CA 141, or the Public Land Act.
  • Dante applied for a free patent in 2008 before the demolition took place. Absent evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that KOT Blg. 35669 was issued in compliance with the requirement for occupation and cultivation.
  • Land Map 882, a land classification map for Camarines Sur approved in 1931 by the DENR, indicates that Pitogo Island is A&D. The map was certified by Manuel Tengco, Jr. (Tengco), Protected Area Superintendent and deputized Public Land Inspector of the DENR.
  • Meanwhile, the respondents failed to present evidence to support their claim that Pitogo Island is not A&D.
  • The case does not concern the validity of the grant of free patent in favor of the Heirs of Mario but merely the rightful possession over the property. Ownership and the validity of a certificate of title may be provisionally resolved but any ruling thereon shall not be conclusive.

Dante has a better right of possession over Lot No. 6972

  • Both Lot Nos. 6972 and 6973 are located at Pitogo Island. If Land Map 882 and the testimony of Tengco are given credence as to the nature of Lot No. 6973, then it should be the same with Lot No. 6972.
  • A land classification map, such as Land Map 882, is reliable proof that a parcel of land has been classified as A&D. There being no evidence to the contrary, Lot No. 6972 is A&D.
  • Dante only seeks to establish that he has a better right of possession than respondents not to obtain title over Lot No. 6972. The records before the Court show that his priori possession of the lot is uncontested and is adequately established by evidence.
  • In their Answer, respondents did not deny Dante’s prior possession of Pitogo Island. They even admitted the same by characterizing the demolition as a “relocation of the Pitogo island occupants.
  • It is also undisputed that Dante had structures built on Pitogo Island and kept animals such as goats and cows thereon.
  • Dante presented a certification from the Office of the Municipal Treasurer that his predecessors-in-interest have paid real property taxes for the property from 1945 to 2009.
  • Tengco confirmed that Dante applied for free patent over Lot No. 6972.
  • Respondents have not presented sufficient evidence of their assertion on the classification of Lot No. 6972 as a protected area, or that they have observed due process in declaring that it should be a protected area for environmental purposes.
  • The National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992, only includes the Caramoan National Park pursuant to Proclamation No. 291 but does not mention Pitogo Island.

dispositive

Petition granted. Decision and Resolution of the CA affirmed with modification. Respondents are ordered to vacate the subject properties, turn over, and restore their possession to Dante.999

Scroll to Top