G.R. No. 174536 - ROBERTO Y. PONCIANO, JR., VS. LAGUNA LAKE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly served, published, and posted. On 29 January 2002, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) entered its appearance in LRC Case No. 273 as counsel for the respondent Republic of the Philippines. At the same time, it deputized the Public Prosecutor of Taguig, Metro Manila, to appear in said case. [6] Respondent Republic then filed with the MeTC its Opposition [7] dated 29 January 2002 seeking the denial of petitioner's Application for original registration of the subject property based on the following grounds: That neither the [herein petitioner] nor his predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of the land in question for thirty (30) years in accordance with Section 48(b), Public Land Act, as amended by PD 1073 and R.A. No. 6940. That the muniments of title, the tax declarations and tax payment receipts of [petitioner], if any, attached to or alleged in the application, do not constitute competent and sufficient evidence of bona-fide acquisition of the land applied for or of his open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation thereof in the concept of owner since June 12, 1945, or prior thereto. Said muniments of title do not appear to be genuine and the tax declarations and/or tax payment receipts indicate pretended possession of [petitioner] to be of recent vintage. That the parcel of land applied for is a portion of the public domain belonging to the Republic of the Philippines not subject to private appropriation. [8] During the initial hearing of LRC Case No. 273 held on 30 January 2002, the MeTC issued, upon the motion of petitioner's counsel, an Order [9] of general default against the whole world, except against the government (which, more appropriately, should be the respondent Republic), represented by the OSG through the Public Prosecutor. Hearings were held in LRC Case No. 273 on 6 and 27 February 2002, wherein petitioner presented testimonial and documentary evidence in support of his Application. Petitioner's evidence, taken as a whole, painted the following picture: Petitioner purchased the subject property from Dolores Viar Vda . De Roldan (Dolores) on 27 July 1998 as evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale [10] bearing the same date. Dolores bought the subject property from her father, Eleuterio Viar (Eleuterio), in 1966 or 1967; [11] who, in turn, inherited the same property from his own father (or Dolores' grandfather). The subject property had been in the possession of the Viar family since 1941, or even earlier. Witness Crispina Viar Vda. De Garcia (Crispina), Dolores' niece and neighbor, testified that the subject property had been in the possession of the Viar family for about 70 to 80 years. [12] The earliest Tax Declaration covering the subject property, though, was issued only in 1949 in the name of Eleuterio Viar. [13] Petitioner paid to the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) the capital gains and documentary stamp taxes due on