Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, premises considered and after hearing on the merits, it is most respectfully prayed of this most Honorable Office to render judgment ordering: 1. The cancellation of Free Patent Titles Nos. VII-4-2974 and VII-4-3088 issued to respondents Alan P. Quijano and Gwendolyn Quijano Enriquez concerning Lot Nos.
WHEREFORE, premises considered and after hearing on the merits, it is most respectfully prayed of this most Honorable Office to render judgment ordering: 1. The cancellation of Free Patent Titles Nos. VII-4-2974 and VII-4-3088 issued to respondents Alan P. Quijano and Gwendolyn Quijano Enriquez concerning Lot Nos. 374 and 379, respectively. 2. The cancellation of Free Patent Application Nos. VII-4-3152, VII-4-3152-A, and VII-1-18277-I of respondents concerning Lot Nos. 376 and 378. 3. The return of possession and ownership of these lots to the complainants/protestants who are the rightful owners by inheritance. Protestants further pray for other relief, just and equitable, under the premises. [6] During the pre-trial conference of August 2, 1991, the protestants/claimants manifested that they were withdrawing their protest/complaint. Thus, on April 14, 1992, the Regional Executive Director rendered a decision [7] giving due course to the applications. However, he ruled that the free patents over Lots 374 and 379 could no longer be disturbed since the complaint for the cancellation was filed more than one year from their issuance. The dispositive portion of the decision reads: WHEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that the above-entitled administrative case be dismissed and dropped from the records. It is further ordered that the Free Patent Application of applicants-respondents over Lot Nos. 376 and 378 be given due course for being in the actual adverse and continuous possession of the land in controversy. Patent/Titles already issued and entered in the Registry Book in favor of applicants-respondents on Lot Nos. 374 and 379 in 1988 and 1989 need not be disturbed anymore, for failure to show evidence of actual fraud in the procurement of such titles. [8] On September 13, 1993, Vicente Sanjorjo, the heirs of Maximo Sanjorjo, namely, Macaria Sanjorjo, Domingo Sanjorjo, Alfredo Castro, and the Spouses Santos and Lolita Inot, herein petitioners, filed a complaint for cancellation of titles under tax declarations and reconveyance of possession of real property covering Lots 374, 376, 378 and 379 located in Medellin, Cebu, against the private respondents, the heirs of Manuel Quijano, namely, Rosa Q. Ledesma, Milagros Q. Yuliongsiu, Alan P. Quijano and Gwendolyn P. Enriquez, and Vicente Gulbe. The petitioners did not implead the rest of the heirs of Guillermo Sanjorjo, including his daughter Tranquilina Sanjorjo, as parties-plaintiffs, and alleged , inter alia 3. That the plaintiffs are the owners of several parcels of land in Antipolo, Medellin, Cebu, which are more particularly described as follows: (a) Lot No. 374 with an area of 14,179 sq.m. and covered by Tax Declaration No. 00718 in the name of PONCIANO DEMIAR and Tax Declaration No. 01042 in the name of TRANQUILINA SANJORJO; (b) Lot No. 376 with an area of 6,177 sq.m. and covered by Tax Declaration No. 01038 in the name of MAURO SANJORJO; (c) Lot No. 378 with an area of 3,201 sq.m. and covered by Ta