Scribd
Upload
481 views

Palomo Vs CA

This case involves a dispute over ownership of 15 parcels of land located in a forest zone. The petitioners claim ownership based on tax receipts and inheritance from Diego Palomo. However, the court ruled that (1) forest lands cannot be privately owned under law as they are part of the public domain, and (2) tax receipts are not conclusive proof of ownership. As such, the petitioners' claims of ownership were denied since the lands were never classified as alienable and the improvements introduced did not convert the lands to private property.

Uploaded by

fjl_302711
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
481 views

Palomo Vs CA

This case involves a dispute over ownership of 15 parcels of land located in a forest zone. The petitioners claim ownership based on tax receipts and inheritance from Diego Palomo. However, the court ruled that (1) forest lands cannot be privately owned under law as they are part of the public domain, and (2) tax receipts are not conclusive proof of ownership. As such, the petitioners' claims of ownership were denied since the lands were never classified as alienable and the improvements introduced did not convert the lands to private property.

Uploaded by

fjl_302711
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Case Title: SPOUSES IGNACIO PALOMO and TRINIDAD PASCUAL, and CARMEN

PALOMO VDA. DE BUENAVENTURA,petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF


APPEALS, THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, FAUSTINO J. PERFECTO, RAFFY
SANTILLAN, BOY ARIADO, LORENZO BROCALES, SALVADOR DOE, and other
DOES,respondents.

G.R. No. 95608

Date: January 21, 1997

Ponente: Romero, J.

DOCTRINE: 1) Law governing natural resources that forest land cannot be owned
by private persons. It is not registrable and possession thereof, no matter how
lengthy, cannot convert it into private property, less such lands are reclassified
and considered disposable and alienable. 2) Neither do the tax receipts which
were presented in evidence prove ownership of the parcels of land inasmuch as
the weight of authority is that tax declarations are not conclusive proof of
ownership in land registration cases.
FACTS:

Diego Palomo is the owner of 15 parcels of land covered by Executive Order


No. 40. On 1916, he ordered the registration of these lands and donated the same
to his heirs, Ignacio and Carmen Palomo two months before his death in April
1937.

Averment that the aforesaid OCT were lost during the Japanese occupation,
Ignacio Palomo filed a petition for reconstitution with the Court of First Instance of
Albay on May 1970. The Register of Deeds of Albay issued Transfer Certificates of
Title Nos. 3911, 3912, 3913 and 3914 sometime in October 1953.

July 1954 President Ramon Magsaysay issued Proclamation No. 47


converting the area embraced by Executive Order No. 40 into the "Tiwi Hot Spring
National Park," under the control, management, protection and administration of
the defunct Commission of Parks and Wildlife, now a division of the Bureau of
Forest Development.

Land was never released as alienable and disposable portion of the public
domain and, therefore, is neither susceptible to disposition under the provisions of
the Public Land Law nor registerable under the Land Registration Act. The
Palomos, however, continued in possession of the property, paid real estate taxes
thereon and introduced improvements by planting rice, bananas, pandan and
coconuts.
April 8, 1971, petitioner Carmen de Buenaventura and spouses Ignacio
Palomo and Trinidad Pascual mortgaged the parcels of land to guarantee a loan of
P200,000 from the Bank of the Philippine Islands.

ISSUES:
Whether or not forest land which is a public domain may be owned by
private persons
Whether or not tax receipt can be use as a proof of ownership over the
claiming lands.

RULING:

There is no question that the lots here forming part of the forest zone were
not alienable lands of the public domain. The adverse possession which may
be the basis of a grant of title in confirmation of imperfect title cases applies
only to alienable lands of the public domain. It is in the law governing
natural resources that forest land cannot be owned by private persons. It is
not registerable and possession thereof, no matter how lengthy, cannot
convert it into private property, unless such lands are reclassified and
considered disposable and alienable.

Tax receipts which were presented in evidence prove ownership of the


parcels of land inasmuch as the weight of authority is that tax declarations
are not conclusive proof of ownership in land registration cases. As to the
forfeiture of improvements introduced by petitioners, the fact that the
government failed to oppose the registration of the lots in question is no
justification for petitioners to plead good faith in introducing improvements
on the lots.

-Caselyn B. Correa

You might also like