Back to Search
JurisprudenceG.R. No. 171136 -

G.R. No. 171136 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. LYDIA CAPCO DE TENSUAN, REPRESENTED BY CLAUDIA C. ARUELO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Cited Laws

RA 537RA 541RA 247,RA 481,RA 172,RA 610,RA 164,RA 61,RA 477,RA 4850,
Share:

TL;DR — Ruling

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that after due notice, publication and hearing, the paraphernal parcels of land hereinabove described be brought under the operation of Presidential Decree No. 1529 and the same confirmed in the name of Applicant. [4] (Emphasis ours.) On August 20, 1998, Tensuan filed an Urgent Ex Parte Motion to Withdraw Lot 1109-B from the Application for Registration and to Amend the Application.

Decision

Ruling

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that after due notice, publication and hearing, the paraphernal parcels of land hereinabove described be brought under the operation of Presidential Decree No. 1529 and the same confirmed in the name of Applicant. [4] (Emphasis ours.) On August 20, 1998, Tensuan filed an Urgent Ex Parte Motion to Withdraw Lot 1109-B from the Application for Registration and to Amend the Application. [5] According to Tensuan, she was withdrawing her Application for Registration of Lot 1109-B because a review of Plan Swo-00-001456 had revealed that said lot, with an area of 338 square meters, was a legal easement. The MeTC, in its Order [6] dated September 30, 1998, granted Tensuans motion. The Republic, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed an Opposition to Tensuans Application for Registration on December 28, 1998. The Republic argued that (1) neither Tensuan nor her predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of the subject property since June 12, 1945 or prior thereto; (2) the muniment/s of title and/or tax declaration/s and tax payment receipt/s attached to the application do/es not constitute competent and sufficient evidence of a bona fide acquisition of the subject property or of Tensuans open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of the subject property in the concept of owner since June 12, 1945 or prior thereto; (3) the claim of ownership in fee simple on the basis of Spanish title or grant can no longer be availed of by Tensuan who failed to file an appropriate application for registration within the period of six months from February 16, 1976, as required by Presidential Decree No. 892; and (4) the subject property forms part of the public domain not subject of private appropriation. [7] The Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) also filed its own Opposition [8] dated February 12, 1999 to Tensuans Application for Registration, averring as follows: That projection of the subject lot in our topographic map based on the technical descriptions appearing in the Notice of the Initial Hearing indicated that the lot subject of this application for registration is located below the reglementary lake elevation of 12.50 meters referred to datum 10.00 meters below mean lower water. Site is, therefore, part of the bed of Laguna Lake considered as public land and is within the jurisdiction of Laguna Lake Development Authority pursuant to its mandate under R.A. 4850, as amended. x x x; That Section 41 of Republic Act No. 4850, states that, whenever Laguna Lake or Lake is used in this Act, the same shall refer to Laguna de Bay which is that area covered by the lake water when it is at the average annual maximum lake level of elevation of 12.50 meters, as referred to a datum 10.0 meters below mean lower low water (MLLW). Lands located at and below such elevation are public lands which form part of the bed of said lake