Republic vs. Spouses Joel and Andrea Noval

When an applicant for judicial confirmation of title proves open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession of agricultural land for the period required by law, the State may not indiscriminately take the property without violating due process, even in the absence of a Department of Environment and Natural Resources certification declaring the land alienable and disposable, provided the State fails to present evidence that the land belongs to the public domain.

Lot 4287 in Barangay Casili, Consolacion, Cebu, was originally possessed by Flaviana Seno Alilin, who cultivated 15 coconut trees on the property. Her son, Miguel Alilin, inherited the land and continued cultivation with root crops and corn. Miguel's daughter, Cecilia Alilin Quindao, subsequently inherited the property, tilled the land, declared it for taxation purposes, and shared produce with her tenant. In 1999, Cecilia and the purchasers of portions of the land filed an application for judicial confirmation of imperfect title, alleging acquisition through purchase coupled with continuous, public, notorious, exclusive, and peaceful possession for more than 30 years.

• Nature of the Application: Respondents sought judicial confirmation of imperfect title under Section 48(b) of Commonwealth Act No. 141 (Public Land Act) over subdivided portions of Lot 4287, Consolacion Cadastre, alleging acquisition through purchase coupled with continuous, public, notorious, exclusive, and peaceful possession for more than 30 years.
• Predecessor's Testimony: Cecilia Alilin Quindao, 73 years old when she testified in 2000, stated that her grandmother Flaviana Seno Alilin had possessed and owned the property with 15 coconut trees since Cecilia was 15 years old (approximately 1942). She recalled her father Miguel Alilin inheriting the property and cultivating root crops, corn, and other plants until his death, after which she inherited and continued possession, declaring the land for taxation and sharing produce with her tenant.
• Transfers and Subdivision: Cecilia sold portions to Joel Noval and Elizabeth Messerli. Messerli subsequently sold to the Spouses Noval and Winnie T. Refi. The property was partitioned into Lots 1 through 7 (except Lot 6 which remained with Cecilia), with specific lots allocated to: Spouses Noval (Lot 1), Ellen N. delos Reyes (Lot 2, via donation from Gertrudes Noval), Zenaida Lao (Lot 3), Winnie T. Refi (Lot 4), Dale Y. Noval (Lot 5), and Daisy N. Morales (jointly with Dale for Lot 7).
• Tax Declarations: Respondents presented tax declarations and payment receipts showing the property had been declared for taxation purposes since 1945.
• DENR Certification: No certification from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources was presented showing the land had been declared alienable and disposable, though respondents noted that the DENR had approved their survey plan when the property was partitioned.
• Republic's Opposition: The Republic argued that respondents failed to prove open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession since June 12, 1945, and asserted that tax declarations were incompetent to show bona fide acquisition or possession.

• Insufficient Proof of Possession: The Republic maintained that respondents failed to demonstrate open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of the land for the period required by law, characterizing their possession as mere casual cultivation.
• Tax Declarations Insufficient: Petitioner argued that tax declarations and receipts are not conclusive evidence of ownership or possession for the requisite 30-year period.
• DENR Certification Required: The Republic asserted that registration cannot proceed without a certification from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources establishing that the property had been declared alienable and disposable, and that the absence of such certification means the land belongs to the State.
• Burden of Proof: Petitioner contended that the burden rests upon respondents to prove that the land was already declared alienable and disposable at the time of application.

• Adequate Evidence of Possession: Respondents countered that Cecilia's testimony was sufficient to establish the nature of her possession and that of her predecessors-in-interest since 1942, satisfying the requirement of possession since June 12, 1945.
• Tax Declarations as Evidence: Respondents argued that the property had been declared for tax purposes since 1945, constituting evidence of claim of ownership.
• DENR Approval: Respondents noted that while no certification was presented, the DENR had approved their survey plan during partition, indicating government recognition of their rights.
• Long-standing Possession: Respondents emphasized that they and their predecessors had possessed the land for over 50 years without government interference, and that the State had accepted real property tax payments without question.

• Requisites for Judicial Confirmation: Whether respondents proved open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of agricultural land under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945 or earlier as required by Section 48(b) of Commonwealth Act No. 141 and Section 14(1) of Presidential Decree No. 1529.
• DENR Certification Necessity: Whether the absence of a Department of Environment and Natural Resources certification that the land is alienable and disposable is fatal to an application for judicial confirmation of title when the applicant has otherwise proven possession for the required period.
• Burden of Proof in Land Registration: Whether the State, in opposing an application for judicial confirmation, must present evidence that the land belongs to the public domain or if it may rely solely on the applicant's failure to produce DENR certification.

• Requisites Satisfied: Respondents established possession since 1942 or earlier through the credible testimony of their predecessor-in-interest Cecilia Alilin Quindao, who recalled her grandmother's ownership when she was 15 years old. This satisfied the requirement of possession since June 12, 1945. Findings of fact by the Municipal Trial Court, affirmed by the Court of Appeals regarding the credibility of witnesses and the nature of possession, are conclusive upon the Supreme Court absent any of the recognized exceptions.
• DENR Certification Not Absolute Barrier: While an applicant must establish that the land is alienable and disposable agricultural land of the public domain, the State cannot defeat the application by merely citing the absence of DENR certification when it fails to present evidence that the land is public domain. The State has a correlative duty to present effective evidence of the public character of the land when it asserts such affirmative allegation.
• Burden on the State: When the State files a pro forma opposition without presenting satisfactory evidence to controvert the applicant's convincing proof of possession and occupation, presumptions tilt in favor of the applicant. The State cannot indiscriminately take property that has been possessed and cultivated by the applicant and predecessors-in-interest for a considerable number of years without violating due process, particularly when it has accepted tax payments on the property without question.

• Judicial Confirmation of Imperfect Title — Under Section 48(b) of Commonwealth Act No. 141 and Section 14(1) of Presidential Decree No. 1529, an applicant must prove: (1) possession by himself or through predecessors-in-interest; (2) open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession; (3) under a bona fide claim of acquisition of ownership; (4) since June 12, 1945 or earlier; and (5) that the property is agricultural land of the public domain.
• Reckoning Date for Possession — The date June 12, 1945 is the reckoning date for the applicant's possession and occupation, not for the classification of the land as alienable and disposable. The land may be classified as alienable and disposable at any time prior to or during the application.
• Presumption Against State Ownership — Every presumption is and ought to be against the government in land registration cases. Open, continuous, adverse, and public possession of land from time immemorial confers an effective title to the possessor, independent of State grant.
• Burden of Proof in State Opposition — The burden of evidence lies on the party who asserts an affirmative allegation. When the State alleges that lands belong to it, it is not excused from providing evidence to support this allegation, particularly when the land has been possessed and cultivated by the applicant for a long number of years without State action to dislodge the occupants.
• Due Process in Land Registration — The State may not, in the absence of controverting evidence and through a pro forma opposition, indiscriminately take a property without violating due process when the applicant has acquired an imperfect title through possession for the period required by law.

• "When an applicant in the registration of property proves his or her open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession of a land for the period required by law, he or she has acquired an imperfect title that may be confirmed by the State. The State may not, in the absence of controverting evidence and in a pro forma opposition, indiscriminately take a property without violating due process."
• "Every presumption is and ought to be against the government in a case like the present. It might, perhaps, be proper and sufficient to say that when, as far back testimony or memory goes, the land has been held by individuals under a claim of private ownership, it will be presumed to have been held in the same way from before the Spanish conquest, and never to have been public land." (quoting Carino v. Insular Government)
• "The burden of evidence lies on the party who asserts an affirmative allegation. Therefore, if the State alleges that lands belong to it, it is not excused from providing evidence to support this allegation."
• "No person in the right mind would pay taxes on real property over which he or she does not claim any title. Its declaration not only manifests a sincere desire to obtain title to a property; it may be considered as an announcement of an adverse claim against State ownership."

• Heirs of Malabanan v. Republic, 717 Phil. 141 (2013) — Controlling precedent establishing that June 12, 1945 is the reckoning date for possession, not for classification of the land as alienable and disposable.
• Carino v. Insular Government, 212 U.S. 449 (1909) — Historical precedent recognizing the presumption against State ownership and private property rights independent of State grant.
• Republic v. Barandiaran, 563 Phil. 1030 (2007) — Followed for the principle that the government is duty-bound to prove that land is public domain when it has been possessed by the applicant for a long time without government action.
• Republic v. T.A.N. Properties, Inc., 578 Phil. 441 (2008) — Cited for the requirements to establish that land is alienable and disposable, but distinguished in application where the State fails to present evidence.
• Susi v. Razon, 48 Phil. 424 (1925) — Cited for the doctrine that possession since time immemorial confers title.

• Commonwealth Act No. 141, Section 48(b) — Allows judicial confirmation of imperfect titles for those in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession of agricultural lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
• Presidential Decree No. 1073, Section 4 — Amends Section 48(b) to specify that the provisions apply only to alienable and disposable lands of the public domain possessed since June 12, 1945.
• Presidential Decree No. 1529 (Property Registration Decree), Section 14(1) — Provides for registration of title to those in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession of alienable and disposable lands since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
• 1987 Constitution, Article III, Section 1 — Due process clause prohibiting deprivation of property without due process of law.

Velasco, Jr. (Chairperson), Bersamin, Martires, and Gesmundo, JJ.