ORDER OF THE THIRD ALIAS WRIT
OF EXECUTION, POSSESSION
AND DEMOLITION
WITH DISMISSAL
TO MOTION FOR RELIEF
OF THE
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
May 28, 1989
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
Branch 111, Pasay City
WILSON P. ORFINADA
P l a i n t i ff
) LRC/CIVIL CASE No. 3957-P
-vsMACARIO RODRIGUEZ AND HEIRS
THE HEIRS OF DON MIGUEL AND
HERMOGENES ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ
DONA AURORA FABELA Y CARDONA
PATRICIA TIONGSON AND HEIRS
PONCIANO PADILLA AND HEIRS
FELIMON AGUILAR AND THE HEIRS
FORTUNATO SANTIAGO AND MARIA
PANTALEONA P.SANTIAGO AND HEIRS
MARCOS ESTANISLAO AND MAURICIO
DE LOS SANTOS/BLAS AND SEBASTIAN
FAJARDO/ANTONIO/EULALIA RAGUA
DON MARIANO SAN PEDRO Y ESTEBAN
AND MARIA SOCORRO CONDRADO HEIRS
THE HEIRS OF FLORENCIA RODRIGUEZ
ESTEBAN BENITEZ TALLANO, ET. AL.,
ENGRACIO SAN PEDRO AND HEIRS
THE ADMINISTRATOR OF BICUTAN
MARKET/MAYSILO ESTATE, ET. AL.,
PEDRO GREGORIO/AGAPITO BONSON
AND HEIRS/BALBINO FRANCISCO
PEDRO ROJAS ESTATE AND HEIRS
EUGENIO MARCELO/JUAN JOSEF
SANTIAGO GARCIA AND HEIRS
MARIANO NONES AND HEIRS
ORTIGAS AND COMPANY PARTNERSHIP
THE ADMINISTRATOR OF PASAY AND
TRIPLE ESTATES/AND THE MARICABAN
ESTATE/PERPETUA AND PERFECTO
AQUINO, ET. AL., ANTONIO FAEL
THE ADMINISTRATOR OF SAN PEDRO
ESTATE/JOSE SALVADOR/MAGNO
FERNANDEZ/DONA LOURDES OCHOA Y
CASAL, SIMONA ESTATE AND THE HEIRS
EXEQUIEL DELA CRUZ AND HEIRS
GERVACIO LOMBO, FRANCISCO SORIANO
QUINTIN MEJIA/CATALINA ESTANISLAO
AND THE HEIRS/JUAN CRUZ AND HEIRS
GABINO JAVIER AND HEIRS
THE MODESTO, EULALIO,TOMAS,
APOLONIO, PEDRO, FRANCISCO, AND
ANTONIO CRUZ, RAFAEL SARAO,
JOSE OLIVER AND THE HEIRS
DOMINADOR DE OCAMPO BUHAIN, ET.AL.
MANUEL QUIOGUE, ESTANISLAO,
EDUARDO AND BERNABE CARDOSO AND
THE HEIRS, ANTONIO AQUIAL,
FELIX AND CLAUDIO OSORIO AND HEIRS
REGINO DELA CRUZ/GIL SANTIAGO
MARCIANO TUAZON AND TUAZON AND
COMPANY, JULIAN AND JUAN FRANSCISCO
2
) For: Quieting of
) Titles/Reconveyance of
) Real Properties with
) Reconstitution
) of TCT No.T-408/TCT No.
) T-409 in accordance with RA
) No. 26 in the
) name of Don
) Gregorio
) Madrigal Acop
) and Don Esteban
) Benitez Tallano
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
SARAO MOTORS/FRANCISCO MOTORS CORP
PHILIPPINE SHARE COMPANY
PILAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
TEODORO LIM, FELIX BAEZ AND HEIRS
VALINTINO GAJUDO/CANDIDO CLEOFAS
FORT WILLIAM MCKINLEY AND THE
MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY
UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
THRU HONORABLE SOLICITOR GENERAL
THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND
REGISTRATION COMMISSION
THE HONORABLE DIRECTOR OF BUREAU
OF LANDS, THE REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES
AND TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Defendants
DON ANNACLETO MADRIGAL ACOP
JULIAN M. TALLANO
Intervenors
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
ORDER OF THIRD ALIAS WRIT OF EXECUTION, POSSESSION
AND DEMOLITION WITH DISMISSAL TO MOTION FOR
RELIEF OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
In the preponderance of evidences by all the
parties in interest to substantiate with the virtue of justice
in the case at bar based on the Court records available, it
was firmly established that the allege ownership interest
of the Republic of the Philippines, over the land in
question is feeble it is Pro Defectu by lack of Primary
Evidence and Presumption of Law even if the Motion for
Reconsideration would be given due course as it was
asserted thru the office of the Hon. Solicitor General. But
if
there
be
any
doubtful
3
conception
as
to
the
Correctness of the Clarificatory Decision and Order
of this Honorable, particularly Judgment with
Compromise Agreement of February 4, 1974 and
January 19, 1976, the predicament is best be applied
to the prejudice of the herein movant, the Republic
of the Philippines because the Honorable Solicitor
General after submission of its proposal in behalf of
the Republic of the Philippines had entered with the
h e i r s o f l a t e P r i n c e J u l i a n M a c l e o d Ta l l a n o , o w n e r o f
t h e l a n d s e v i d e n c e d b y O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4 , w h e r e p o r t i o n
o f t h e l a n d s o w n b y D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o ,
c o v e r e d b y T C T N o . T- 4 9 8 , a n d t h a t D o n G r e g o r i o
M a d r i g a l A c o p , o w n e r o f t h e l a n d u n d e r T C T N o . T4 0 8 , t h r u B e n i t o A . Ta l l a n o , a j u d g m e n t w i t h
Compromise Agreement which was rendered on
February 4, 1972, hence, the Republic of the
Philippines is barred by Estopel and the pain of Res
Judicata. Instead, based on the Court records, the
movant tolerated the long period of time before its
motion for reconsideration had been filed on February
26, 1989, yet, it took a long overdue for more than
thirteen (13) years now before said motion has been
f i l e d f i n a l l y, p e r h a p s , n o t f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t b u t a
means of dilatory tactics to defeat the motion of the
I n t e r v e n o r f o r t h e i s s u a n c e o f T h i r d A l i a s Wr i t o f
4
Execution, Possession and Demolition.
That after February 4, 1972 Judgment with
Compromise Agreement, the Clarificatory Order was been
issued on November 4, 1975 that rectified the
Clarificatory Order of March 21, 1974 together with
its Clarificatory Decision which was issued on January
19, 1976 correcting, amending and reversing the
p r e v i o u s o n e b y o p e r a t i o n o f t h e l a w, s a i d d e c i s i o n ,
including that judgment with Compromise Agreement
dated February 4, 1972, and orders had been long
became final and executory on February 19, 1976, and
the same way properly executed on several occasions,
while that judgment of February 4, 1972 was executed
o n A p r i l 7 , 1 9 7 5 t h r u p r i v a t e s h e r i f f , A t t y. E p i t a c i o
Sobejana and another execution were rendered on
November 7, 1974 and on March 7, 1979 by virtue of
Writ of Execution, Possession and Demolition dated
September 10, 1974 where Court approval that deputized
A t t y. E p i t a c i o S o b e j a n a a s P r i v a t e S h e r i f f c e r t i f i e d b y
v i r t u e o f S h e r i ff ’s R e t u r n o f N o v e m b e r 1 7 , 1 9 7 5 a n d t h a t
ALIAS WRIT OF EXECUTION, POSSESSION AND
DEMOLITION dated October 8, 1978 and duly certified by
v i r t u e o f S h e r i ff ’s R e t u r n o f M a y 4 , 1 9 7 9 f o r a n d i n f a v o r
o f t h e I n t e r v e n o r s , M r. J u l i a n M . Ta l l a n o , D o n G r e g o r i o
5
Madrigal Acop and Don Annacleto Madrigal Acop. The
case at bar had been rested in peace for quite so long
and its judicial stability should be well respected in
toto without exemption.
Nevertheless,
assuming
therefore,
the
Clarificatory Decision and Order in the case at bar is
Sine Perjuicio, it became final after the prescribed time
frame within which to perfect an appeal shall have
terminated accordingly or lapsed and that will, upon
the lapsation of 30 days from the days on which the
party who may appeal have been served with a required
notice of judgment. Indeed, after January 19, 1976,
Clarificatory Decision which reached to February 20,
1976, by the operation of the law said proceedings
supposed to become final on February 20, 1976. And
s i n c e t h e t i m e f o r a p p e a l i s f i x e d b y l a w, i t p r o v i d e s
an allowance by taking off there from the period during
which a Motion to set aside the judgment or for
r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n h a s b e e n p e n d i n g . A s s u m i n g , m o r e o v e r,
that the judgment is erroneous, except when such facts
were really recorded and the attention of this
Honorable Court had been usually called upon like
what the Intervenors had done previously calling the
a t t e n t i o n o f m y p r e d e c e s s o r, t h e n H o n . C F I J u d g e
6
Enrique Agana that many times asserting their rights
for correction on November 4, 1975 before lapse of
t i m e , s u c h e r r o r, u n l e s s j u r i s d i c t i o n a l c o u l d h a v e
been corrected by regular appeal within the time
f r a m e . N a t u r a l l y, D e c i s i o n s a n d O r d e r s , w h e t h e r
erroneous or not, became final after the time frame
a s f i x e d b y l a w, o t h e r w i s e , l i t i g a t i o n w o u l d b e f a t a l
to all when institution of justice would have no end,
yet, no court suit would be finally settled for justice,
a n d Ti t l e s t o p r o p e r t i e s a n d s u b j e c t i n t e r e s t i n v o l v e d
would, the same, become precarious if the government
a u t h o r i t y, f o r b a s e l e s s r e a s o n s , w o u l d b e a l l o w e d t o
re-open then anew said court proceedings which had
been long put into rest in accordance with the tenet
of jurisprudence (Daquis vs. Rusion, et. al., 913;
M a r a m b a v s . L o z a n o , 6 4 , O . G. 4 2 , O c t . 1 4 , 1 9 6 8 ) . I n
t h e c a s e ( P e o p l e v s . O l a r t e , G. R . N o . L 2 2 4 6 5 , F e b .
2 8 , 1 9 6 7 , 6 3 , O . G. , N o . 2 7 , p . 6 6 7 3 , J u l y 1 , 1 9 6 8 ;
SCRA 494). Even the Supreme Court can not even
change the doctrine adapted in the Interpretation of
the law affecting this subsequent case made by Justice
Tr i b u n a l o f a n y l e v e l . B e c a u s e , u n d e r s a i d c o u r t
litigation, it was held that the subsequent reinterpretation of the law could be applied only to a
new case and certainly not to a case that had been long
7
resting and meritoriously resolved for a long time finally
and conclusively determined. In as much as judicial
d o c t r i n e h a v e o n l y p r o s p e c t i v e o p e r a t i o n . Ye t , p o s t e r i o r
changes in the doctrine of justice system by the Supreme
Court can not retroactively affect on amending or
nullifying a prior final decision in the same proceedings
where previous court litigation Ex- Acquitate done,
whether the case be civil or criminal in nature.
As it was observed by this Honorable Court,
there were an apparent strategic deception over the
m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e S o l i c i t o r i n t o d a y ’s m o t i o n
alleging that required court proceedings in the case
at bar had never held and it was purely a mistake of
t h e S O L G E N ’s S o l i c i t o r i n r e p l y i n g t h e J u d g m e n t i n
favor of the intervenors, while, they allege, there were
no proceedings at all which was a baseless ground in
t o t o . I t ’s o n t h e i r b u r d e n i f i t d e n y a p a r t y o f t h e i r
d a y i n c o u r t . B u t l e t ’s o p e n o u r e y e s t o a j u d i c i a l
wisdom in a case of Claveria vs. Honorable Palacio,
5 6 , O . G. , 2 1 6 1 a s m e n t i o n e d ;
“But while the rule is that the client
must suffer the consequence of the negligence
or incompetency of his counsel, this rule should
8
not be applied where this would result in denying
a party of his day in court or in preventing him
from fairly presenting his case.” (U. S. vs. Umali,
15, Phil. 33; U. S. vs. Dungca, 27, Phil., 274;
People vs. Manzanilla, et. Al., 43, Phil., 67; Mont e s v s . R e g i o n a l T r i a l C o u r t o f Ta y a b a s , e t . a l . , 4 8 ,
P h i l . , 6 5 0 ; V i v e r o v s . S a n t o s , e t . a l . , 5 2 , O . G. ,
1924), especially where, as in the present case, the
intervenors has no evidence that the aggrieved
p a r t y, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e H o n o r a b l e S o l i c i t o r G e n e r a l ,
was guilty of dilatory tactics.
I n t h e c a s e a t b a r, t h e H o n o r a b l e S o l i c i tor General failed to file its motion for Reconsideration within a time frame to prove their allegation that were no proceedings. But why they failed
t o f i l e s u c h r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e l a w, t h a t c a u s e d
the Republic of the Philippines dented for its essential days in Court, which was incontrovertible
on the circumstances that was held by Intermediate Appelate Court, to wit:
A decision rendered without giving a
p a r t y h i s d a y i n C o u r t i s N u l l a n d Vo i d
(Luz
vs.
Court
of
First
Ta c l o b a n , 7 7 P h i l . , 6 7 9 ) .
9
Instance
of
We n e e d t o d i g e s t t h r u s u p p l e m e n t a l w o r d s
“ N u l l a n d Vo i d ” b e c a u s e t h e i n c i d e n t w o u l d n o t
be in conformity to the instant case, which;
“A judgment void upon its face and requiring
only
an
inspection
of
the
record
to
demonstrate its validity is a mere nullity and,
in legal effect, no judgment at all. Such
judgment has been characterized as a dead
limb in the judicial tree which may be chopped
off anytime, capable of bearing no fruit to
plaintiff but constituting a constant menace to
defendant”. ( I Freeman Judgment 643-645).
If
we
subscribe
the
defense
of
the
Honorable Solicitor General in the above entitled
case alleging that they have no knowledge over the
mistakes and negligence of their Solicitor, this
e n t i r e l y, p u r p o r t i n g t o d e c e p t i o n t h a t t h e r e w e r e n o
Court Proceedings, it would open a vacuum for a
lawyer to pass through in compromising their
clients’ cause to the preponderance of opposing
p a r t y i n i n t e r e s t . Ve r y c l e a r l y , t h e H o n o r a b l e
Solicitor General have a direct control over his
Solicitors considering the office they represented
is a government agency with paramount importance,
10
complete of legal staffs and lawyers including bounty
resources and facilities as a means for the defense to
seek justice in the interest of the general public as
our Constitution demands for it. But in spite of such
stability in their situation, still they missed to comply
t h e j u d i c i a l r e q u i r e m e n t s i n C o u r t . O n t h e c o n t r a r y,
the Republic of the Philippines, through its Solicitors,
I N D E E D A N D A C T U A L LY h a d t e c h n i c a l l y e m p l o y e d
t h e i r d e f e n s e b y t a k i n g C R O S S E X A M I N AT I O N t o t h e
I n t e r v e n o r, M r. J u l i a n M . Ta l l a n o , b e f o r e t h i s A m i c u s
Curae; and this Hon. Court, that later on such defense
served nullity to the government after the intervenor
re-affirmed their solid ownership interest over the
land in dispute, as follows:
(EXCERPT FROM CROSS EXAMINATION OF J. M. TALLANO
DATED JANUARY 7, 1974 BEFORE THE AMICUS CURAE)
Honorable Asst.
Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez
Q . M r. Ta l l a n o , w h o i s i n p o s s e s sion of the land covered by
t h a t T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d T C T
N o . T- 4 9 8 ?
Witness
J. M. Tallano
A.
We a r e i n p o s s e s s i o n s i n c e
the year 1764 up to the
p r e s e n t , S i r.
11
Honorable Asst.
Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez
Q. On what way as you mentioned
that you are in possession of the
land since 1764?
Witness
J. M. Tallano
A. Beside of its Torrens Titles TCT
No. T–408 and that TCT No. T-498
and that OCT 01-4 which were
issued
in
the
name
of
my
predecessors, the land land itself
has been tilling by my forefathers
since the year 1764 by planting
million of fruit bearing mango
trees, bananas, variety of fruit
bearing
trees,
pineapples,
sorghum, yellow corn and sugarcanes and furtherly we are tilling
the land we inherited up to the
present time. Another point was
that my ancestors were the ones
who built such BALARA WATER
RESERVOIR and the Novaliches
Dam as our irrigating system to
our plants that forced the National
Government thru its late President
Manuel Roxas to en ter into
12
yearly lease agreement with our
family since the year 1948 and it
was ended only in the year 1969.
Honorable Asst.
Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez
Q. Who is paying the amelioration
taxes of the land?
A. We were the one since the year 1948
Witness
J. M. Tallano
up to the year 1969 and it was
stopped only when we were
afftected by sky rocketed rate of
assessment tax increases. In deep
sense, I have in possession 20
pieces of Realty Tax Receipts which
started in the year 1948 to 1969.
Honorable Asst.
Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez
Q . M r. Ta l l a n o , y o u m e n t i o n e d
Solicitor Gen. Gutierez in your
testimonies in our previous hearing
that you’re the true and direct heir
of Don Esteban Benitez Tallano and
Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop, that
proof can you present to this
Honorable Court relevant to your
claim as direct descendants?
13
Witness
J. M. Tallano
A . A c t u a l l y, i n t h i s H o n o r a b l e
S a l a , y o u r H o n o r, D o n E s t e b a n
B . Ta l l a n o , n o w i n h i s 9 8 t h
years of age, and Gregorio
Madrigal Acop, also in his
96th years of age, are both
physically present in this
H o n o r a b l e C o u r t S i r. T h a t
medium built old man wearing
white pant and white long
sleeves with white shoes and
with gold chain necklace and
wearing
sunglasses
is
prominently known as Don
E s t e b a n Ta l l a n o , C o m p a d r e o f
former President Diosdado
Macapagal, cousin of Irenea
Macaraeg
of
Binalonan,
Pangasinan, while, that fair
complexioned old man about
5’5” in height wearing beige
colored pants and red stripe
polo
shirt
also
wearing
sunglasses with curly hairs and
also with big gold necklace
14
seated at the right side of Don
E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o i s
prominently known as Don
Gregorio Madrigal Acop, who
both signed a Court required
Sworn Affidavits recognizing me
being their Estate Judicial
Administrator, Your Honor. That
another document I have in my
present possession our Honor are
Certification by concurrent
Supreme
Court
Justice
H e r m o g e n e s C o n c e p c i o n , J r.
affirming the true name and
personal
identity
predecessors,
Benitez
Don
Ta l l a n o
of
my
Esteban
and
Don
Gregorio Madrigal Acop who
are also both Compadre of
the Hon. Chief Justice. And
another Certification issued
by former President of the
Philippines, Mr. Diosdado Macapagal,
now the President of the Constitutional Convention affirming
15
the true name and personal
identity of the two prominent
Hacienderos, because that
time Ex-President Diosdado
M a c a p a g a l h a d a p p o i n t e d M r.
B e n i t o Ta l l a n o , m y f a t h e r, a s
his campaign manager that
made him garner a land slide
v o t e i n S a n J o s e C i t y, N u e v a
Ecija during his presidential
candidacy in the year 1961.
Along that time it caused a
connecting relation to Don
E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o , t h e
g r a n d f a t h e r o f B e n i t o Ta l l a n o ,
who is closer to the former
President of the Philippines of
t h e f a c t t h a t t h e m o t h e r- i n - l a w
of Ex-President Macapagal,
the second cousin of Don
E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o a n d
Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop of
Pangasinan and Bulacan, has
been known to him undoubtedly.
16
N o w,
perusal
to
all
the
facts
and
circumstances in this Honorable Court, it has been
furtherly stressed a question on what grounds do the
Honorable Solicitor General could claim that the case
at bar had been predicated by judgment with no court
proceedings? Perhaps the Hon. Solicitor General
wants to plant merely confusion to this Honorable
Court of Justice toward re-opening of the case since
they are barred from stipulation and that its
“Judgment with Compromise Agreement” between the
Ta l l a n o H e i r s w o u l d b e e n t i r e l y a f f e c t e d b y w h i c h ,
if we will abide such strategic maneuver, it could be
considered an action for the reopening of the land
registration case or toward strategic proceedings
against
such
“Judgment
with
Compromise
Agreement”, but, again, the Doctrine of Res Judicata
barred the Honorable Solicitor General from doing
so. Because it was clearly in a case (Grey Alba vs.
dela Cruz, 17, Phil., 49, 1910) that Res Judicata is
applicable in registration proceedings with or without
oppositions instituted for the registration of a private
land, the judgment of the Court confirming the title
o f t h e a p p l i c a n t o r o p p o s i t o r, a s t h e c a s e m a y b e ,
and ordering its registration in his name or in the
name of successful litigant particularly late Prince
17
J u l i a n M a c l e o d Ta l l a n o o v e r t h i s O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4
constitutes, when final, Res Judicata against the whole
world because the Doctrine applies to all cases and
proceedings including Land Registration and Cadastral
proceedings (Royal Audiencia vs. Roman Catholic Church,
R. Ad. 1886).
The battle lines drawn appropriately from
the parties concern including the Hon. Solicitor
General were all judicially required remedies thru
their submitted pleadings and contra-pleadings and
evidences as they had been exercised such rights but
still it turned out futile they missed convincing
evidences for this Honorable Court to adopt it in toto
against the Intervenors.
Originally, it was long been resolved according
to judicial procedure that said TCT No. T-408 and that TCT
No. T-498 that has been derived from OCT 01-4 which was
issued by virtue of Royal Decree in favor of the intervenor ’s
predecessor, late Prince Julian Macleod Tallano, in the
year 1764 and the Royal Audiencia adjudicated finally
against the late Hermogenes Rodriguez in favor of said
Prince Julian Macleod Tallano on the year 1861 ended 1864,
yet, said Titles are titles from probative origin, and the
18
same had been passed thru crucial test by judicial
a ff i r m a t i o n o f t h e l a n d R e g i s t r a t i o n C o u r t d u r i n g t h e
corresponding approval and issuance of the said Decree
of Registration no. 297 on October 3, 1904. That on that
context, it had been granted accordingly, affirming, said
OCT 01-4 was valid from probative nature of land titles
of ownership prescribed by the Land Registration Act 496,
particularly, over the land in question – the KEYBIGA
(QUEBIGA) HACIENDA, which long became final upon
such decree of confirmation and registration that had been
entered, yet, it binds the land and quiet any title thereto
subject to Section 39 of Land Registration Act No. 496.
And it is a universal acceptance that it should be
conclusive upon and against all persons including the
government authority and all its agencies thereof, whether
it mentioned by the name in the notice or citation or
included in the general description “TO ALL WHOM IT
MAY CONCERN” because ACTION OF REGISTRATION
L I K E T H AT O F C A D A S T R A L H E A R I N G U N D E R R A
2259, WHERE THE SAME LAND HAD UNDERGONE, IS
AN ACTION IN REM, YET, CORRESPONDINGLY, IT IS
A NOTICE TO ALL THE WORLD.
I n d e e d , w h e n t h e i n t e r v e n o r ’s p r e d e c e s s o r s i n
interest obtained the decree of Registration and the
19
r e c o r d i n g o f s a i d o r i g i n a l C e r t i f i c a t e o f Ti t l e O C T N o .
T- 0 1 - 4 , h a d b e e n d o n e j u d i c i o u s l y, i t h a d b e e n c o n s t r u e d
as an agreement running with subject lands and finally
binding upon the land owner and all successors in title
and interest, thereto, that the subject land should be and
always remain registered land in favor of the lawful
t r a n s f e r e e - o w n e r, e m b r a c i n g i t s e x p e d i e n c y Ti t l e s i n a s
m u c h a s s a i d Ti t l e s , T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d T C T N o . T- 4 9 8
a r e To r r e n s T i t l e s , p e r s e , c a n n o t b e s u b j e c t e d b y
prescription. In other words, prescription for a torrens
title is unavailing not only against its hereditary
successors but also to all persons claiming similar
rights against the owners and the herein intervenors.
To t h i s e f f e c t , t h e l a n d o w n e r s h i p u n d e r t h i s L a n d
Registration Act 496 and RA 2259 protected by the
D o c t r i n e o f R E S J U D I C ATA .
And along the same doctrine of ownership over
the land in question, it has also been long settled in the
c a s e a t b a r, t h a t t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s s t e a d i l y h e l d
vigorously in favor of the registered owners-intervenors
whose interest and legal rights over the subject land
had been acquired by virtue of judicial proceedings
and by way of principle of fee almpie as provided by
20
Maura Law under Royal Decree of February 10, 1894
in compliance with the Royal Decree of January 26,
1 8 8 9 , w h i c h i s n o w d u b b e d a s Ti t u l o d e C o m p r a . T h a t
possession over the properties in dispute originated
from more than 400 years since time immemorial, and
clearly having been registered as owners over the
subject land for more than two (2) centuries and having
possessed and titled the same during such period since
the
year
1764
without
adjustment.
It
became
indefeasible and imprescriptible against any one and
could not be disturbed by another court proceedings or
b y s t r a n g e r a l o n e i n d e r o g a t o r y t o s a i d Ti t l e s , V I C U R E
CUJUS, torrens title cannot be subjected for collateral
attack unless fraud would be an issue against said
Ti t l e s , B u t s u c h c l a i m s h o u l d b e f i l e d w i t h i n t h e t i m e
frame, one year after the date of the issuance of the
decree of registration or before it perfect its appeal but
such action must be direct, and not by collateral attack
or collateral proceedings which totally barred the
claimants of doing so. Like what happened in the case
of the Republic of the Philippines, thru its Hon.
Solicitor General, it lost its rights to assert its motion
for reconsideration or this Motion for Relief by virtue
o f t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e l a w.
21
For purpose of record, on March 21, 1974,
this Hon Court rendered judgment in the above
entitled case in favor of the Intervenors, Julian M.
Ta l l a n o a n d A n n a c l e t o M a d r i g a l A c o p a n d n o t
Annacleto Madrigal Acopiado which this Court had
admitted it was a mere commission of clerical errors
on the ground that Annacleto Madrigal Acopiado is
different from Annacleto Madrigal Acop, a two
different persons, while that Annacleto Madrigal
Acopiado, his real Civil Registry is Annacleto
Montanez Acopiado, so this Hon. Court had corrected
this
into
Annacleto
Madrigal
Acop,
the
true
I n t e r v e n o r. A n d t h r u t h e M o t i o n o f t h e H o n . S o l i c i t o r
General, in behalf of the Republic of the Philippines,
dated November 7, 1975, and thru the motion of the
Intervenors also dated November 7, 1975 both parties
in interest urged this Honorable Court to correct and
rectify said Order dated November 4, 1975 on the
reasons as pleaded by the said Intervenors, the Hon.
Court, thru its stenographic clerks, committed grave
e r r o r s c l e r i c a l l y. W h i l e t h e c o n t e n t i o n o f t h e R e p u b l i c
of the Philippines, the Hon. Court failed to appreciate
the value of the new evidences of the government that
had been submitted against the Intervenors’ evidences.
22
On the issue of jurisdictional requirement that
had been raised by the Republic of the Philippines through
its Hon. Solicitor General against the intervenors, alleging
that said party’s legal interest over the subject matter is
fatal and guilty for being failed to comply such docket
fee towards acquisition of Jurisdiction, said argument of
the Honorable Solicitor General for and in behalf of the
Republic of the Philippines is clearly beyond the tenet of
jurisprudence and law.
In a wider judicial wisdom which was
universally taken into practice by prominent luminaries
in the legal profession and, augmentedly augurs by the
Rule 141 Section 7 (a) of the Rules of Court as it stood
a t t h e t i m e o f f i l i n g o f c o m p l a i n a g a i n s t p e t i t i o n e r,
docket fees for ordinary action should be based on
the total sum claimed, exclusive of interest, or the
stated value of the property in litigation. Thus the
docket fees should be computed on the basis of the
value of the property and the amount of the related
damages claimed, exclusive of interest. Where the
action involves real property and a related claim for
damages as well, the legal fees should be assessed
on the basis of both (a) the value of the property and
23
(b) the total amount of the related damages sought (Tacay vs.
Regiona; Trial Court LRO, SCRA 433, 444 (1989). Thus on
that instances, the CFI then under my predecessor, which
decided the case at bar for Julian M. Tallano, et. al., Intervenor
required jurisdiction over the case filed by the Plaintiffs
Wilson P. Orfinada, et. al., Intervenor required jurisdiction
over the case filed by the Plaintiffs Wilson P. Orfinada, et
al., after the said plaintiff and satisfactorily completed the
payment of the said docket fees which the said Hon. Clerk of
Court was the one who computed said filing fees.
Besides, the Rules of Law related to the
jurisdictional requirements delves generally to all party in
interest in as much as the Plaintiff, Wilson P. Orfinada, in
his claim over the area of 1,203 hectares of raw land having
an assessed value of P10,000 per hectare sometime in 1962,
when the said complaint originated, had a total filing fee
of P25,000.00 including the cost of miscellaneous. For
humanitarian interest let us mend the agony of the
Intervenors, et. al., the victim of oppression and curtailment
of constitutional rights.
That the following real properties should be
recovered far and in favor of the ntervenors and Heirs,
t h e Ta l l a n o a n d A c o p c l a n s :
24
1.
Parcels of lands covered by spurious Decree 35584
allegedly containing an area of 3,305.75 hectares,
evidenced by OCT 730 both in Mariquina, Quezon City
and Pasig, under Registration Book No. A-7in the
name of spurious land owners Marciano Severo
Tuazon, Juan Jose Tuazon, Natividad Zaragoza and
Augusto Huberto Y dela Paz;
2.
A parcel of land spurious claims by the last defendant,
Don Mariano San Pedro, covered by Composicion Col
El Estado, OCT 4136 dated April 29, 1894,embracing
three (3) lots; Lot No. 103 with an area of 169,922
hectares, Lot No. 112 with an area of 169,562 hectares,
and Lot No. 113 with an area of 229,206 hectares, under
LRC, SWO – 15320 situated in the Capitol District,
Quezon City;
3.
A parcel of land, Lot 1, Block 51, portion of a
spurious PSD-57020 and PSD-10532, Cadastral No.
7 6 8 1 , s i t u a t e d i n S i t i o B a g o B a n t a y, Q u e z o n C i t y
a l o n g C o n g r e s s i o n a l Av e n u e , b o u n d e d o n t h e S o u t h
by Line 1-2-3, by Block B-6, Northwest, by spurious
Decree 2084; on the North along line 3-4 by Culiat
C r e e k o n t h e We s t a n d N o r t h w e s t ; a l o n g 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8
by Lot 5, Block 51, on the East; along Line 8-1
25
by road Lot 4, both of the Subdivision Plan,
containing an area of 24,097.60 square meters
evidenced by spurious Land Titles TCT
152000 from OCT 736,Decree No. 17431;
Bautista identified as Lot 1, fictitious Plan
PSU 65652, situated in Sitio Dilang, Cainta,
Rizal, containing an area of Seventy Five
Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Three (75,943)
square meters, and Lot No. 2, also of spurious
origin, PSU 65652 situated in the same area,
Sitio Dilang, Cainta, Rizal containing an area
of 19,552 sq. m. evidenced by spurious and
v o i d L a n d Ti t l e O C T 4 3 3 1 ;
5.
A parcel of land covered by void Land
Title
under
claimed
by
OCT
735
Francisco
and
spuriously
B.
Francisco
containing an area of 2,768.9521 square
meters but its technical description is
defective and in an open polygon affecting
the area of Quezon City land which was
covered by valid and lawful Land Title
TCT 498 from OCT 01-4 in the name of Don
E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o , t h a t h a d b e e n
26
ex e c u t e d a n d t o o k o v e r f o r t h e p e r p e t u a l p o s s e s s i o n
o f t h e r i g h t f u l o w n e r, D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o
so the same should be repossessed by way of this
WRIT OF EXECUTION AND DEMOLITION;
6.
A parcel of land, Lot 5, Block 8, respectively under
P l a n P S D 2 3 3 8 4 , p o r t i o n o f L o t 9 11 d e s c r i b e d i n
spurious Plan PCs-13, GLRO, situated in Quezon
C i t y, b o u n d e d o n t h e N o r t h b y L o t 4 , B l o c k 8 ; o n
the East by Lot 19, Block 8, on the South by Lot 2,
B l o c k 8 ; a n d o n t h e We s t b y s t r e e t L o t 4 , c o n t a i n i n g
an area of 387.20 hectares, more or less, spuriously
evidenced by TCT No. 300828 derived from OCT
614, which was declared null and void ab initio;
7.
A parcel of land in Bo. Diliman, Quezon City
a l o n g L i n e 1 - 2 b y C o m m o n w e a l t h Av e n u e , o n
the East along Line 2-3 by Lot 4-B, also with
s p u r i o u s P S D - 1 0 0 1 4 ; o n We s t a l o n g L i n e 3 - 4 b y
Road, on the Northeast along Line 4-1 by Road,
containing an area of Seven Thousand Four
Hundred Seventy Eight (7,478) square meters,
evidenced by spurious TCT No. 305618 in the
n a m e o f P e d r o T. C a s i m e r o d e r i v e d f r o m O C T
730 which was declared null and void from
27
the beginning by the Order of this Court, CFI
Branch 28, Pasay City under this LRC/Civil Case
No. 3957-P;
8.
A parcel of land, Lot I-A of the spurious Subdivision
Plan PSd 18832, described on void PSd 4859
(G.L.R.O. Record 7681), containing an area of Thirty
Three Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three (33,623)
square meters, more or less, in the name of Deogracias
B. Babalaon under TCT 300828 derived from OCT 730
which was declared null and void ab initio;
9.
A parcel of land situated in Sitio Tatlong Cawayan
containing an area of Two Thousand Eight Hundred
Ninety Eight (2,898) square meters and another Thirty
Seven Thousand Ninety Eight (37,098) square meters
evidenced by TCT 21100 in the name of Jesus Gomez
derived from OCT 589 which was declared null and
void ab initio;
10. A parcel of land containing an area of Three Hundred
Twenty (320) square meters, more or less, portion of
Block 12, Lot No. 169 of the spurious Pasay Estate,
bounded on the Northeast by Lot 341; on the Southeast
by Lot 331; on the Southwest by Lot 168 and on the
28
Northwest by Lot 153; the same should be recovered
i n f a v o r o f t h e h e i r s , t h e Ta l l a n o , A c o p c l a n ;
11 . A p a r c e l o f l a n d , L o t N o . 1 4 3 7 - B o f t h e
Subdivision Plan, PSd-13684, which is spurious
i n n a t u r e b e i n g a p o r t i o n o f L o t 1 4 3 7 , G. L . R . O .
C a d . R e c . N o . 1 3 5 2 w h i c h w e r e v o i d i n c h a r a c t e r,
c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f O n e H u n d r e d Tw e n t y F i v e
(125) square meters in Pasay City Estate, bounded
on the Northeast by Lot 1436 of Pasay city
Cadastre; on the Southeast by Calle Chingxiang;
on the Southwest by Lot No. 1437-A of the
Subdivision Plan; on the Northwest by Lot 1417;
said lots covered by spurious documents should
be recovered by virtue of this Order in favor of
the legitimate owner;
12. A parcel of land, Lot 1 covered by spurious Plan
11-2939 situated in Bo. Barangca, Mariquina,
R i z a l , n o w, Q u e z o n C i t y, c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f
F o r t y T h r e e T h o u s a n d F o u r H u n d r e d S e v e n t y Tw o
(43,472) square meters allegedly in the name of
Fermina Castor evidenced by spurious TCT No.
43747, from fictitious OCT No. 393 which were
declared null and void ab initio;
29
13. A n o t h e r p a r c e l o f l a n d , L o t 2 o f v o i d 11 - 2 9 3 9
situated also in Bo. Barangca, Municipality of
M a r i q u i n a , n o w Q u e z o n C i t y, a l s o e v i d e n c e d b y
spurious TCT No. 43747 in the name of Fermina
Castor derived from OCT No. 393 which was declared
null and void ab initio;
14. A p a r c e l o f l a n d s i t u a t e d i n B o . A l m a n z a o f t h e
Municipality of Las PiHas, bounded on the Northeast
by Road, on the Southeast by the spurious claimsp r o p e r t i e s o f Z a c a r i a s G r e g o r i o , To m a s E u s e b i o ,
Raymunda dela Cruz, all of declared spurious
claimants on the Southwest by the spurious land claims
of Raymunda dela Cruz and Sotero Trinidad; on the
We s t b y L o t N o . 2 ; a n d o n t h e N o r t h w e s t b y t h e
spurious land claims of Higino Espadilia, containing
an area of: for the Lot 1, 142,433 square meteres; for
the Lot 2, containing an area of 58,209 sq. m. allegedly
claim by Agapito Bonso covered by OCT 4085 which
were declared null and void ab initio;
15. A parcel of land, Lot 29 (LRC) PSd 29, portion of Plan
11-8152, situated in Bo. Guirayang, Municipality of
San Mateo, Province of Morong, now Rizal, bounded
on the Northeast point 2 to 3 by Lot No. 20; on the
30
Southeast, point 3-4 by Lot 23; on the Southwest, point
4 to 1 by Lot 28, all of the Subdivision Plan and on
Northwest point 1 to 2 by PSU 32606, containing an
area of One Hundred Forty Three Thousand Five
Hundred Eighty Six (143,586) square meters, more
derived from OCT 2750 which were declared null and
void; or less, evidenced by TCT 110992 in the name of
Remedios I.Sunga
16. A)
A p a r c e l o f l a n d s i t u a t e d i n S i t i o Tu b i g a n ,
Barangay Sorosoro of BiHan, Province of Laguna,
spuriously claim by Natalio Layos, but it should
be Salvador Layos, the original tenant in the area
of the Don Esteban Benitez Tallano Estate, portion
of Hacienda Quebega, containing an area of Four
Hundred Fifteen Thousand Six Hundred Thirty
(415,630) hectares; and
B)
Another parcel of land under the same spurious
claimant Natalio Layos located in Sitio Tubigan,
Bo. Sorosoro, BiHan, Laguna, containing an area
of Seven Hundred Two Thousand Four Hundred
Thirteen (702,413) square meters;
17. A parcel of land situated in Bo. Canlogan, Pasig,
portion of spurious OCT 844 under spurious
31
Decree 16858 containing an area of Fourteen
Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Four (14,274) square
meteres more or less, the same Decree and Land Title
OCT 844 were declared null and void ab initio;
18. A parcel of land situated in Caloocan, now Quezon
C i t y, c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f F o u r H u n d r e d T h i r t y
Nine hectares and Nine Thousand Three Hundred
Tw e n t y Tw o s q u a r e m e t e r s ( 4 3 9 . 9 3 2 2 h e c t a r e s ) ,
under spurious Plan II-4816, evidenced by spurious
OCT 632 in the name of Eulalio Ragua, et.al., which
was declared null and void ab initio;
19. A p a r c e l o f l a n d c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f O n e
Hundred Four hectares and Eight Thousand Eight
Hundred Fifty Four square meters (104.8854
hectares), more or less, evidenced by spurious
OCT 0-538 and OCT 561 which were declared null
and void ab initio in the name of Afable, et.al.,
a n d Vi l l a s i c a , e t . a l . , t h e a l l e g e d c l a i m a n t s ,
s i t u a t e d i n J u n t a l , Tu y, B a t a n g a s ;
20. A p a r c e l o f l a n d c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f 1 5 8
hectares situated in the Bo. of Pinagkawitan,
Lipa City bounded by Timbungan on the
32
Northeast, on the Southwest is Tihero River, on the
South by Flores Garein evidenced by OCT 174, OCT
140, OCT 4553, OCT 4731, under Decree 641327,
641328, OCT 130 Decree No. 641328, OCT 0-117-P,
OCT 213 under Decree No. 52860, which were all
declared null and void ab initio should be recovered
for and in favor of the Tallano Estates;
21. A parcel of land containing an area of One Thousand
Seven Hundred Fifty (1, 750) hectares situated in Bo.
Caluangan Magallanes, Marigundon, Cavite, and area
of One Thousand Fifty (1, 050) hectares in Bo. Pacheco
and One Thousand One Hundred Seventy (1,170)
hectares in Bo. baliwag alsomagallanes in Marigundon,
Cavite should be recovered and declared for and infavor
of the Tallano Estates;
22. A parcel of land containing an area of Thirty Seven
Thousand and Three Hundred Sixty Eight hectares and
Tw o
Hundred
Tw e n t y
Seven
square
meters
(37,368.0227 hectares) more or less, spuriously under
Lot No. 7718, LRC Cadastral Record No. 1555 and Lo
No. 7719 situated in Barangay Rosario and San Jose,
Mauban, Quezon under Tax Declaration, 17-37-0130 for
a total area of 1,987.3841 hectares; and another
33
309.4922 hectares also in Sto. Nino, Mauban, Quezon; and another
14,879.4131 hectares, Forest and Private lands with 15 kilometers
shore line along Lamon Bay, Pacific Ocean, the same should be
repossessed for and in favor of the Tallano Estates;
23.
Several parcels of lands:
A)
Lot 14584-B,under spurious PSd 224470 being a portion
of Lot 14584, Lipa Cad., LRC Cad. Rec. No. 1302 situated
in the Bo. of Talisay, Municipality of Lipa, Batangas
containing an area of 539,111 square meters more or less
evidenced by OCT 0-14-R which was altered but now it
was corrected by virtue of this Order;
B)
Lot 14550-B of the Subdivision Plan, LRC PSd-210111
being a portion of Lot 14550 Lipa Cad., LRC Cad. Rec.
No. 1302 situated in Bo. Talisay, Lipa, Batangas containing
an area of 17,417 square meters, evidenced by OCT No.
0070 which was declared null and void;
C)
Lot No. 14545 of the Cad. Survey of Lipa, situated in the
Bo. of Talisay, Lipa, Batangas, containing an area of 4,060
square meters, evidenced by OCT 9602 which was declared
null and void;16858 containing an area of Fourteen
Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Four (14,274)
square meteres more or less, the same Decree
and Land Title OCT 844 were declared null and
void ab initio;
34
D)
Lot 14767 Cad. Survey of Lipa, Plan-Ap-3276
LRC Case No. L-610 situated in the Bo. of
S a p a c a n d Ta l i s a y, L i p a , B a t a n g a s c o n t a i n i n g
an area of 439,585 square meters, evidenced
by spurious OCT 169-r which was declared
null and void;
E)
Lot No. 14571 situated in Bo. Malitlit and Talisay
of Lipa, Batangas containing an area of 1.9572
hectares, and Lot 14767 containing an area of
43.9585 hectares, Barangay Malitlit, Lipa,
Batangas, the same should be recovered in favor
of the Tallano Estates;
F)
Lot No. 14578, under spurious Plan-SWO-0548,
Case No. 28, G.L.R.O. Rec. No. 2374 situated in
Bo. Talisay, Lipa, Batangas containing an area of
Twenty Nine (29,829) square meters evidenced
by OCT No. 0-14-R which was altered instead of
OCT 01-4 but it was corrected by virtue of this
Order, the same should be recovered in favor of
the Tallano Estates;
G)
Lot No. 14549-B, Plan PSd-64790 being a
portion of Lot 14549,
containing an area of
37,105 square meters evidenced by OCT 7535
which was declared null and void, also be
recovered in favor of the Estate owner;
35
H)
Lot no. 15522-C situated in Bo. Sapac, Lipa,
Batangas, containing an area of 10,000 square meters
evidenced by OCT 8763 which was declared null and
void, the same should be recovered in favor of the
Tallano clan, the Estate owner;
I)
Lot No. 15522-C situated in Bo. Sapac, Lipa,
Batangas containing an area of 10,000 square meters
evidenced by OCT No. 8763 which was declared null
and void;
J)
Lot No. 15002 situated in Barangays Sto. Nino and
Talisay, Lipa, Batangas containing an area of 21,193
square meters, evidenced by OCT No. 8868 which
was declared null and void ab initio;
K)
Lot no. 15002 containing an area of 42,536 square
meters situated in Bo. Sto. Nino, Talisay, Lipa,
Batangas, evidenced by OCT 9472, which was
declared null and void ab initio
L)
Lot No. 6797 containing an area of 50,561
square meters, situated in San Celestino,
Lipa, Batangas, evidenced by spurious OCT
8869/9474 which were declared null and void
ab initio;
M)
Lot 14542 containing an area of 6,811 square
meters evidenced by spurious OCT 9601 which
was declared null and void;
36
N)
Lot No. 14889-A containing an area of 5,156 square
meters, situated in Sto. Nino, Talisay, Lipa, Batangas
evidenced by spurious OCT 6711 which was declared
null and void ab initio;
O)
Lot No. 2772
3,194 square meters
Lot No. 2778
2,151 square meters
Lot No. 2276
1,442 square meters
Lot No. 2773
4,992 square meters
Lot No. 2728-O
27,310 square meters
Lot No. 2732-C
9,040 square meters
Lot No. 2732-A
25,218 square meters
Lot No. 2739-A
22,322 square meters
Lot No. 2735
7,767 square meters
Lot No. 2734
6,347 square meters
Lot No. 2718
97,310 square meters
Lot No. 3412
302 square meters
Lot No. 2730-A
6,274 square meters
Lot No. 2731
33,090 square meters
Lot No. 2738
32,854 square meters
Lot No. 2706
270,053 square meters
situated in Bo. Timbao, BiHan, Laguna evidenced
by spurious OCT 242 which was declared null and
void ab initio, the same said lots should be
repossessed for and in favor of the real owners,
the Tallano clan;
37
2 4 . A Aparcel of land Lot 2 bounded on the Northeast by
Kaymisasa River; on the South by the spurious claim
of Domingo del Mundo; on the West by Dry Creek;
on the North by Lot 1, under spurious PSU 04000379, containing and area of 8.8 hectares situated
in Barangay Castanas Bailon (or) Aguinaldo, Cavite
Province, the same should be recovered for the
Tallano Estate;
25. A)
A parcel of land situated on the Eastern portion
of Pasig containing an area of approximately 700
hectares bounded on the West by Felix Avenue
and on the North by Marcos Highway, the same
should be recovered for the Tallano Estate;
B)
A parcel of land bounded on the North by DoHa
Juliana Subdivision proposed project, and the
proposed Life Home Subdivision, on the East by
Felix Avenue, on the West by the proposed Cruz
A. Robles Subdivision and Buena Mar proposed
subdivision containing an area of 400 hectares,
more or less;
C)
A parcel of lands embracing the Barrios of
R o s a r i o , M a y b u n g a , K a n l o g a n , S t o . To m a s ,
S a n A g u s t i n , S a n M i g u e l , St a . C r u z , M a l i n a o ,
S a n J o a q u i n Av e n u e , a l s o e m b r a c i n g t h e r e o n
38
Bo. Kalawaan Sur and Kalawaan Norte
including Palatiw and Pinagbuhatan, bounded
o n t h e E a s t b y D r. S i x t o A n t o n i o Av e n u e ; o n
the
North
by
O r t i g a s Av e n u e
and
by
Riverside, Countryside, and De Castro
Homesite Proposed Subdivisions, containing
an area of 2,225 hectares, more or less; all
these lots should be recovered in favor of the
Ta l l a n o E s t a t e ;
D)
A p a r c e l o f l a n d b o u n d e d b y O r t i g a s Av e n u e ,
o n t h e We s t b y E . R o d r i g u e z Av e n u e , o n t h e
South by Pasig Boulevard, on the East by Sixto
A n t o n i o Av e n u e e m b r a c i n g t h e a r e a o f U g o n g
Sur containing an area of 700 hectares, more
or less, the same should be recovered for and
i n f a v o r o f t h e Ta l l a n o E s t a t e s .
2 6 . A p a r c e l o f l a n d e m b r a c i n g B a r a n g a y St a . A n a ,
Pateros, bounded on the West by M. Almeda Avenue,
on the South by Bagong Calzada St., on the North by
P a s i g C a d a s t r e , o n t h e E a s t b y Ta g u i g C a d a s t r e
containing an area of 1,850 hectares;
27. A
parcel
of
Pinagkawitan,
land
embracing
Lipa
To w n
the
bounded
area
of
on
the
Southwest by the National Road on the Northwest
39
by Lot 11322 and Lot 11982, on the North bounded by
Timbungan River, on the Southeast by the Municipality
of Padre Garcia Cadastre containing an area of 1,587,073
sq. meters;
28.
A parcel of land embracing the area of Quezon City,
embracing the area of Diliman for a total area of
433.7574 hectares, for the Commonwealth area
embracing an area of 496 hectares, portion of the whole
Quezon City including Novaliches over an area of 16,670
hectares;
29.
A parcel of land embracing the area of Antipolo,
Cuinayan, San Mateo, Bosoboso, Antipolo for a total of
2,379 hectares and 422 square meters, Cupang embracing
an area of 121.77 hectares, San Roque and Sitio Don
Enrique (Tallano) in Antipolo over an area of 3,869
hectares; Barangay dela Paz and Hinulugang Taktak
covers an area of 3,774 hectares, Barangays Sto. NiHo
and San Jose embracing an area of 4,892.7 hectares,
Barangay Cugio (Bosoboso), Antipolo embracing an area
of 4,557 hectares;
30. A parcel of land along the on-going construction
of North Expressway embracing the area of
40
Barangay Lawang Putting Bato within the Meycauayan
C a d a s t r e a n d Va l e n z u e l a C a d a s t r e w i t h e x i s t i n g
14 fruit bearing Mango trees containing an area
of 37.7 hectares;
3 1 . A parcel of land embracing the area of Bagong Barrio
over a 57 hectares and that Bagong Silang in
Caloocan consisting an area of 2,071.7785 hectares,
that barrio in Sampaloc, Tanay, Rizal consisting an
a r e a o f 1 3 1 . 1 5 9 4 h e c t a r e s , a n d t h a t i n Te r e s a a n d
Tanay consisting an area of 15,031.5639 hectares, and
in Hulo San Felipe Neri (Mandaluyong) should be
recovered for and in favor of the heirs of Don Juan
Ejercito consisting an area of 476 hectares situated
in Mandaluyong town and that in Norzagaray
including Barrio Tigbi, Sitio Pamusuan and Barrio
Bayabas consisting an area of 25,095.4432 hectares,
more or less;
32. A parcel of land in Sitio Gagalengin, Sitio Pritil, Sitio
Putting Bato, Tondo, Manila consisting an area of
785.70 hectares; Sitio Tutuban and Barangay Divisoria
consisting an area of 417.61 hectares; Barangay La
Huerta; Barangay Sto. NiHo including Sitio Asinan,
ParaHaque, Greater Manila Area;
41
33. A p a r c e l o f l a n d p o r t i o n o f B a g u i o C i t y e m b r a c i n g
the area of Bo. Navy Base consisting of 700
hectares, Bo. John Hay consisting of 6,970 hectares
should be recovered for Mateo Carino’s 750 hectares
and that Bo. Dontogan, Benguet consisting an area
of 1,331 hectares;
34. A p a r c e l o f l a n d e m b r a c i n g t h e P a d r e G r e g o r i o
Crisostomo Estate situated in Bo. Padre Crisostomo
in Cabanatuan City embracing up to the area of
Mabini up to the Sta. Rosa Cadastre in San
B a r t o l o m e , St a . R o s a , N u e v a E c i j a a l o n g M c A r t h u r
H i g h w a y, i d e n t i f i e d D e c r e e N o . 3 4 7 3 1 2 , C a s e N o .
1 5 1 5 , G. L . R . O . N o . 2 5 6 9 8 , P l a n I I - 11 2 8 8 w h i c h
w a s s p u r i o u s i n n a t u r e , a l s o i n c l u d e d S i t i o B o g n o y,
Barrio Soledad,Municipality of Sta. Rosa which
i n c l u d e s t h e a l l e g e c l a i m o f To m a s N u n e z , M a c a r i a
I g n a c i o , F l o r e n c i o Tu l u s a n a n d A n i c e t o C a t a h a n ,
o n t h e S o u t h i n c l u d e s t h e c l a i m o f A n t o n i o St a .
M a r i a a n d a l s o i n c l u d e s t h e c l a i m o f Vi c t o r i o
Garcia, Adriano dela Cruz, except that of Cipriano
Vi l l a r a m a a n d J u l i a n d e G u z m a n w h i c h w a s
acquired by way of Deed of Absolute Sale from the
o r i g i n a l o w n e r D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o , t h e
h e i r s o f P r i n c e J u l i a n M c L e o d Ta l l a n o Ta g e a n ) ,
42
the holder of OCT 01-4; that the property of Padre
Gregorio Crisostomo consisting of 3,737.70 hectares
had been a subject of pure lease by original owner to
the lessor, late Padre Gregorio Crisostomo but the
document was falsified by the Department of
Agriculture and the same was altered, decreed,
registered in the name of the Republic of the
Philippines, inspite of the fact that said land was part
of Tallano Estate evidenced by OCT 01-4;
That around 75 hectares along said
McArthur Highway,and another 400 hectares along the
Sapang Bognoy has been reverted in favor of Retired
Major Eduardo Joson, Sr. who acquired said property
from Don Esteban Benitez Tallano in consideration of
his assistance in relocating the subject Estate;
35. A parcel of land containing an area of 1,217 hectares
including the area under unlawful detaineer of Vicente
Adiwang, situated in Barrio Dantogan, Baguio City;
36.
A parcel of land containing an area of 192,886 square
meters identified Lot 2, bounded on the South by Upper
Session Road and Session Interchange Circumferential
Road, on the East bounded by Creek and South Drive,
43
on the North bounded by Lot 3, Section F, on the
N o r t h e a s t b o u n d e d b y Te a c h e r s C a m p , o n t h e
Southwestern portion, is the Government Center
Reservation, and on the North-western is existing
Man Road; situated is Bo. Camp John Hay, Baguio
City, Benguet;
37.
A parcel of land containing an area of 173,029 square
meters, situated in Bo. Maly Gulaayang, San Mateo, Rizal
Province, on the East bounded by Man’s Road and
Montalban Cadastre, and on the Northwestern portion
bounded by San Mateo Cadastre, and on the Western
portion bounded by San Mateo Cadastre and on the South
also by San Mateo Cadastre;
38.
A parcel of land consisting of around 750 hectares
in Barrio Casili, Cabuyao, Laguna should be taken
over for and in favor of the Tallano Clan in Honor of
his cousin, late Pedro Benitez Casile, the lessee of
the Colegio de San Juan in behalf of Don Esteban
Benitez Tallano;
39. A parcel of land containing an area of 176,531 square
meters situated in Barangay San Jose, San Mateo, Province
of Rizal, bounded on the East is a property squatted by
44
Fl a v i a n o N i c o l a s E m e t e r i o p o r t i o n o f t h e E s t a t e , o n
the South bounded by an area squatted by C. Cru,
F. S a n t o s a n d G. C r u z a l s o p o r t i o n o f t h e E s t a t e ,
o n t h e We s t b o u n d e d b y a n a r e a s q u a t t e d b y
L . Orena,Gregorio Santos and Santos C. Ocampo
portion of the Estate;
40. A parcel of land identified Lot 1, 2 and 3, Parcel
1, portion of PSU 2031, on the North bounded by
l o t p o r t i o n o f P a r c e l 1 P S U 2 0 3 1 , o n t h e We s t b y
portion of Parcel 1 PSU 2031, on the South portion
of Parcel 1 PSU 2031 on the East bounded by
I m e l d a Av e n u a ( o l d n a m e – S u c a t - P a r a n a q u e R o a d ) ,
situated in Sitio Pildira 3, Ibayo, Paranaque
containing an area of 93,863 square meters;
4 1 . A p a r c e l o f l a n d ( L o t 4 , Ts - 3 9 = L o t 2 9 o f R e s . S e c .
“ L ” o f B a g u i o To w n s i t e , p l a n S w o - 3 2 0 7 6 , C i v i l
R e s e r v a t i o n R e c o r d n o . 2 11 ) , s i t u a t e d i n t h e R e s .
Sec. “L,” City of Baguio containing an area of
41,837 square meters, more or less;
42. A p a r c e l o f l a n d s i t u a t e d a l o n g t h e N i n o y
A q u i n o H i g h w a y ( f o r m e r l y Ta g a y t a y - L a u r e l
Road) on the Southwest as the City Hall and
45
t h e p r o p o s e d P N P H e a d q u a r t e r o f Ta g a y t a y C i t y a t
the stretch length of 4,000 meters from the corner
of Laurel Cadastre, and at the stretch width of
5,000 meters, containing an area of 2,000 hectares,
more or less;
43.
A parcel of land situated in the area of Mabiga
Hacienda, Clark Air Force Base embracing Sapang
Bato, Angeles City, Balibago, Angeles City, Mabiga,
Sta. Ines, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga traversing
s o u t h t o C r e w Va l l e y w i t h a s t r e t c h l e n g t h o f 1 5 , 2 0 0
m e t e r s f r o m We s t t o N o r t h f r o m Z a m b a l e s C a d a s t r e
u p t o B a m b a n , Ta r l a c C a d a s t r e a n d a t t h e s t r e t c h
width of 53,000 meters from East to South
originated from Bamban Cadastre to San Jose
C a d a s t r e o f Ta r l a c c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f 8 0 , 5 6 0
hectares, more or less;
44. A parcel of land consisting of 20,000 square meters
situated along EDSA facing last corner of Harrison
St. should be recovered and be turned over to Mayor
Pablo Cuneta or his heirs who paid said lot partially
f r o m D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o o n t h e y e a r 1 9 6 0
amounting
to
P500,000.00,
the
balance
P3,500,000.00 should be paid upon possession.
46
of
45.
That an area of 35,000 square meters, more or less,
along Bonifacio St. and David St. in Pasay City should
be recovered and be turned over to the intervenor,
Mr. Julian M. Tallano.
THEREFORE, in view of the failure of the
Republic of the Philippines to conform substantially to the
prescribed Rules on THE MOTION FOR RELIEF/
RECONSIDERATION in the case at bar has been
DISMISSED WITH COST AGAINST THE REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES AND ALL PARTIES CONCERNED IM
SO FAR AS THE CASE BECAME FINAL, EXECUTORY
AND IT HAD BEEN EXECUTED for so many times and it
was TERMINATED AND HAD BEEN RESTED IN PEACE
FOR SO LONG AGO. While Motion for the Third Issuance
of Alias Writ of Execution, Possession and Demolition and
Execution for the Issuance of reconstituted copies of the
duplicate and its originals of OCT No. T-01-4, TCT No.
T-408 and TCT No. T-498 of the concern Honorable
Register of Deeds that has jurisdiction over the land area
where the land is located has been granted, commanding the
Clerk of Court, Atty. Jose E. Ortiz, to act as Sheriff of this
Branch, and Deputized Atty. Epitacio Sobejana as PRIVATE
SHERIFF to execute both February 4, 1972 Judgment with
Compromise Agreement, that March 21, 1974 and that
47
Clarificatory Decision of January 19, 1976 which
were partially executed by recent WRIT OF
EXECUTION and that SECOND ALIAS WRIT OF
E X E C U T I O N . A n d e n f o r c e f o r t h e i s s u a n c e o f Ti t l e s ,
recover, repossess all subject land areas covered by
l o s t b u t r e c o n s t i t u t e d T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 , T C T N o . T- 4 9 8
a n d l a n d c o v e r e d b y O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4 i n a c c o r d a n c e
with March 21, 1974, January 19, 1976 and that of
February 4, 1972. Judgment with Compromise
Agreement throughout the country and the same
should be turned over to the owner provided said
execution will not defeat the interest of the
government, both national and local, over the land
actually occupied by its structures and buildings
particularly by Land Reform Program, except those
open spaces, farm or residential lots which are found
w i t h i n v a l i d L a n d Ti t l e s ;
That all lands occupied by the national or
local government, whether forest, agriculture or not
that would be intended for conversion from its
original purpose and eventually for sale defeating the
intended beneficiaries, the same should be recovered,
and be turned over to the land owners/intervenors for
the sake of the Filipino farmers.
48
F u r t h e r l y, t o a u g m e n t y o u r f u n c t i o n i n
a c c o r d a n c e t o l a w, e ff e c t i v e l y, y o u a n d y o u r d e p u t i z e d
P r i v a t e S h e r i ff , P N P, N B I p e r s o n n e l a n d o r m e m b e r s o f
the Philippine Army are hereby empowered to arrest and
i m p r i s o n a n y p e r s o n e i t h e r c i v i l i a n o r o f f i c i a l c a p a c i t y,
f r o m t h e g o v e r n m e n t o r a n y p r i v a t e o ff i c e i n c l u d i n g t h a t
Barangay officials who are found in the direct or
indirect unlawful detainers and or selling rights over
the land and or becomes an obstruction of justice.
Furthermore,
this
Honorable
Court
maintained its Judgment with Compromise Agreement
on February 4, 1972, Clarificatory Order dated March
21, 1974, and Clarificatory Decision on January 19,
1976 that correction of which was merely the land areas
from exhorbitant into a correct area of 125,326.37
h e c t a r e s e v i d e n c e d b y T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d t h a t 2 7 1 , 2 7 6
h e c t a r e s f o r t h e T C T N o . T- 4 9 8 , a n d r e m a i n e d
sustainable with all the rights and interest in favor of
t h e I n t e r v e n o r s , M r. J U L I A N M . TA L L A N O a n d D O N
A N N A C L E TO M A D R I G A L A C O P a n d n o t t o A c o p i a d o s
that appears in November 4, 1975 Clarificatory Order
which was unenforceable after five (5) years of no
execution which said period had been lapse in toto. And
as clearly embroiled in a Judgment withCompromise
49
Agreement of February 4, 1972, Clarificatory Order
of March 21, 1974 and January 19, 1976 which
r e m a i n e f f e c t i v e a n d , l i k e w i s e , e n f o r c e a b l e f o r e v e r,
while it were executed judicially but also embroiled
by the agreements and stipulation set forth in a
Judgment
with
Compromise Agreement
dated
February 4, 1972 that prescription to execute the
same and for the issuance of the reconstituted copies
o f t h a t O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4 , T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d T C T N o .
T- 4 9 8 t o g e t h e r w i t h i t s l o s t c o p y o f o w n e r s a n d
duplicate copies of the originals for and in favor of
t h e l a t e P r i n c e E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o a n d l a t e D o n
Gregorio Madrigal Acop which should be reckoned
from the January 1, 1999 from which said five (5)
years prescription of execution over said judgment
should take effect immediately upon payment of the
Republic of the Philippines for its damage liability
of P2 Billion pesos together with its 7% per annum
interest which was commenced in the year 1968
e n d i n g D e c e m b e r 3 1 , 1 9 9 8 t o t h e Ta l l a n o s . T h i s i s
t o c o v e r t h e r e q u i r e d R e a l t y Ta x e s d u e t o t h e
government both local and national in as much as
p a y m e n t o f R e a l t y Ta x e s s u b s t a n t i a l l y e s s e n t i a l w h i l e
the aforementioned Land Titles are indispensable
thereon in their issuance thereof.
50
That land areas covered by OCT No. T-01-4 embracing the whole archipelago, including the Sabah Islands, Turtle
Islands and Kalayaan Islands embracing a total of 7, 134 Islands with an area of 1,049,212.962 square nautical miles
should be determined by actual relocation based on its technical description available as submitted by the Geodetic Engineer in cooperation of those in the Bureau of Lands, it’s the
land should be based from the original landmark in Binondo
Church in Intramuros, City of Manila;
And that Islands of Kalayaan, Turtle Islands and
Sabah should be recovered by way of this Third Writ of Execution, Possession and Demolition and all structures thereon
which do not belong to the Republic should be cleared and
demolished and the Intervenor should cooperate with the government to file for said repossession thru the International
Court of Justice.
You are as well empowered to clear, demolish or
remove any form of structures that will be found in the subject land area.
That you are also commanded to require
and impose order to concern Honorable Register
of Deeds and his/her implementing staffs of the
51
Province and City where the lands are located to issue the
reconstituted copy of the duplicate and copy of its original
of OCT No. T-01-4, of the Hon. Register of Deeds of the
City of Manila, TCT No. T-408 of the Hon. Register of
Deeds of the Province of Bulacan in Malolos and TCT No.
T-408 of the Honorable Register of Deeds of the Province
of Rizal in Pasig without, in as much as the Rules of Court
over the five years reglamentory period to execute the
Decision with Compromise Agreement of February 4,
1972, Clarificatory Order of March 21, 1974, and that
Clarificatory Order of January 19, 1976 cannot be enforced
and it was barred by statute of limitations and
imprescriptible beyond the terms and conditions embodied
in the said Decision with Compromise Agreement between
the Republic of the Philippines and the Intervenors, Mr.
Julian M. Tallano and Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop. That
five years prescription period to execute the said Decision
and Order in favor of the movant should reckon from the
time the National Government has fully paid the required
fifty (50) percent of its obligation in the form of damages
to the movants, which will take effect only after thirty
years from the year 1968, considering that payment of
Realty Taxes of the subject land in indispensable upon
theissuance of the reconstituted copy of the duplicate and
the original of subject Land Titles.
52
Furthermore,
the
movant
has
as
much
satisfactorily complied, and had met the elements
required by the laws in order to reconstitute the subject
L a n d Ti t l e s , a s i t w e r e c i t e d i n a c a s e o f C h i n e s e
Nationalist Party vs. Bermudo, Court of Appeals,
CA-44100-R of December 1, 1972; like as follows:
1.
T h a t t h e C e r t i f i c a t e o f L a n d Ti t l e h a s b e e n
lost and destroyed
2.
That the petitioner is the registered owner
or has an Interest therein
3.
T h a t t h e C e r t i f i c a t e o f L a n d Ti t l e w a s i n
force a the time it was lost or destroyed
4.
That the Petition for Reconstitution has
been fully complied by the movant in
accordance with Republic Act No. 26
approved
on
September
25,
1926,
requiring a Judicial Reconstitution, as
g o v e r n e d b y P. D . 1 5 2 9 w h i c h t o o k e f f e c t
o n J u n e 11 , 1 9 7 8 .
C l e a r l y, i f t h e C o u r t o f J u s t i c e a d h e r e s t o
the norm of jurisprudence in order to vindicate for
justice, the land owners, victimsof land anomalies
and clandestine land grabbing, the same should
53
let them lawfully enjoy their constitutional rights
and the force of the law should be applied now in
favor of the victims of unjust Compromise Agreement
of February 4, 1972, Clarificatory Order of March
21, 1974, and that Clarificatory Order of January 19,
1976 that contradicts the Rules set forth in a LRA
circular No. 3 of December 6, 1968 of the Land
Registration Commission.
Ordering the Secretary of the DENR
a n d t h e D i r e c t o r s o f i t s i m p l e m e n t i n g a g e n c y,
the Office of the Land Management Bureau
from
Region
1
to
13
to
reconstitute
all
pertinent documents, records, data and survey
plans of the subject lands for and in the name
of the land owner/Intervenors, Mr. Julian
M . Ta l l a n o , l a t e D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z , l a t e
P r i n c e J u l i a n M a c l e o d Ta l l a n o , l a t e P r i n c e
Lacan
Acuna
Madrigal
Ta g e a n ,
Acop
and
late
late
Don
Don
Gregorio
Annacleto
Madrigal Acop, provided it will not hamper the
land reform of the National Government, that
the priority of which, is to preserve the
i n t e r e s t o f a l l f a r m e r s / t e n a n t s o f t h e c o u n t r y.
54
Furthermore, therefore, let the following Orders
should be complied and be implemented, as follows:
1.
Ordering the Honorable Register of Deeds of the City of
Manila to issue the Reconstituted duplicate and original
copy of Land Title OCT No. T-01-4 and in favor of the
l a t e P r i n c e L a c a n Ta g e a n ( Ta l l a n o ) , P r i n c e J u l i a n
Macleod-Tallano, Don Esteban Benitez Tallano or to
their immediate successor in interest, Mr. Julian M.
Tallano, a Judicial Administrator of the Estate
2.
Ordering the Honorable Register of Deeds of the
Province of Rizal to issue the Reconstituted duplicate
and original copies of TCT No. T-408 to and in favor
of the late Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop or to his
i m m e d i a t e s u c c e s s o r i n i n t e r e s t , M r. J u l i a n
M.Tallano, a Judicial Administrator of the Estate
3.
Ordering the Honorable Register of Deeds of the
Province of Bulacan to issue the Reconstituted
duplicate and original copies of TCT No. T-498 to
and in the name of Don Esteban Benitez Tallano or
to his immediatesuccessor in interest, Mr. Julian M.
Tallano, a Judicial Administrator of the Estate.
55
Otherwise, defiance thereof, said Honorable
Register of Deeds, his/her implementing staffs should
be charged for obstruction of justice and that
corresponding penalties should be imposed against the
violating party or parties.
L e t t h i s A l i a s Wr i t o f E x e c u t i o n , P o s s e s s i o n
a n d D e m o l i t i o n b e e x e c u t e d a c c o r d i n g l y w i t h o u t d e l a y,
and the parties should be observe the policy of secrecy
as enforced by the National Intelligence Coordinating
Agency of the Government for National Interest
embracing Sovereign Issue.
SO ORDERED.
P a s a y C i t y, M a y 2 8 , 1 9 8 9
( S G D ) S O F R O N I O G. S AY O
Judge
SAS/JEO
Copy furnished:
O ff i c e o f t h e H o n . S o l i c i t o r G e n e r a l
Salcedo St., Makati
Metro Manila
56
57