G.R. No. 200223 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, V. LAKAMBINI C. JABSON, PARALUMAN C. JABSON, MAGPURI C. JABSON, MANUEL C. JABSON III, EDGARDO C. JABSON, RENATO C. JABSON, NOEL C. JABSON, AND NESTOR C. JABSON, REPRESENTED BY LAKAMBINI C. JABSON, ATTORNEY-IN-FACT.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the verified application for registration of title of the subject lots filed by the applicants Lakambini, Paraluman, Magpuri, Manuel III, Edgardo, Renato, Noel and Nestor, all surnamed Jabson, and Tala J. Olega is hereby GRANTED. Upon this decision becoming final, let the corresponding decree of registration be issued to herein applicants. [9] The RTC found that respondents Jabson acquired the properties from their predecessors-in-interest who, in turn, have possessed the same since time immemorial. Upon acquisition, respondents Jabson possessed the parcels of land for more than 30 years in an open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious manner, and in the concept of an owner. Moreover, their title was never disputed by other persons occupying the land. Thus, the RTC ruled that respondents Jabson satisfactorily proved and established their rights over the subject properties, in compliance with Section 14(1) and (2) of Presidential Decree No. 1529. Aggrieved, petitioner Republic of the Philippines (Republic) elevated the case to the Court of Appeals. The Ruling of the Court of Appeals On January 30, 2009, the appellate court rendered a Decision [10] (Original Decision) in petitioner Republic's favor, to wit: WHEREFORE, the appealed decision of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City (Branch 161) is REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the instant application for registration and confirmation of title DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. [11] The Court of Appeals held that in land registration cases, the applicant has the burden of showing that he is the real and absolute owner in fee simple of the land applied for. [12] Thus, to have his imperfect title confirmed, the applicant must present evidence to prove that his possession has been adverse, continuous, open, public, peaceful, and in the concept of an owner [13] since June 12, 1945 or earlier. However, the appellate court noted that the rule on confirmation of an imperfect title grounded on adverse possession does not apply unless and until the subject land has been released in an official proclamation to that effect so that it may form part of the disposable lands of the public domain. To this end, the applicant must secure a certification from the Government that the land applied for is in fact alienable and disposable. [14] It found that respondents Jabson did not present any evidence showing that the San Jose property had already been classified as alienable and disposable land of the public domain. A plain photocopy of a purported Community Environment and Natural Resources Office (CENRO) Certification dated May 14, 1998, which tended to show that the Bagong Katipunan property is "within the alienable and disposable zone," was submitted to the trial court. [15] However, the Court of Appeals noted that no party identified, testified to, nor offered the certification in evidence. Thus, the Court of Appeals held that it cannot be admitted in evidence. Moreover, even if respondents Jabson offered in ev