G.R. No. 202950 - BALTAZAR IBOT, VS. HEIRS OF FRANCISCO TAYCO, REPRESENTED BY FLORA TAYCO, WILLY TAYCO AND MERLYN T. BULANTE.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, in the light of all the foregoing considerations, the court hereby renders judgment in favor of the [petitioner] and against the [respondents]: 1. Denying the petition for reconveyance and dismissing the instant action; 2. Ordering the [respondents] to turn over the peaceful possession of Lot No. 299, Bsd-10105, [OCT] No. P-62053, Register of Deeds of Cotabato unto and in favor of the defendant; 3. To remove all the structure that they have put up in the premises under pain of being removed at their own expense. 4. No pronouncement as to cost. IT IS SO DECIDED. [18] According to the RTC, the circumstances behind the issuance of the petitioner's certificate of title clearly established that he duly filed an application for registration of the property and complied with all the requirements of the law. On the contrary, the respondents failed to present any document evidencing the alleged transfer of rights from Amelita to the spouses Tayco in order to establish their claim of sale, and that what the respondents presented were nothing more than mere allegations. [19] The RTC further noted that the petitioner's OCT No. P-62053 was issued on October 23, 1997 while the respondents' complaint for reconveyance was filed only on September 23, 1999. Considering that more than a year had lapsed before the case was filed, the title had become indefeasible and can no longer be subject to review. [20] On appeal, the CA reversed [21] the judgment of the RTC and the decretal portion of its decision reads: WHEREFORE, the assailed Decision is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE . Appellants, HEIRS OF FRANCISCO TAYCO, represented by FLORA TAYCO, WILLY TAYCO and MERLYN T. BULANTE, a re hereby declared as the legal owners of Lot No. 299, Bsd-101505. Appellee Baltazar Ibot, Jr. is ORDERED to RECONVEY the property described in Original Certificate of Title No. P-62053 in favor to [sic] appellants. SO ORDERED.