Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. 5246 September 16, 1910
MANUELA GREY ALA, ET AL., petitioners-appellants,
vs.
ANACLETO R. !E LA CRU", objector-appellee.
Ramon Salinas, for appellants.
Aniceto G. Reyes, for appellee.
TRENT, J.:
These petitioners, Manuela, Jose, Juan, an !rancisco, surna"e #re$ $ Alba, are the onl$ heirs of %o&a 'e(una Alba Cle"ente an
)onorato #re$, ecease. Re"eios #re$ $ Alba, a sister of the petitioners, *as "arrie on the +,st a$ of March, ,-./, to 0icente
Re$es an ie on the ,/th of Jul$, ,-.1, *ithout leavin( an$ heirs e2cept her husban. The four petitioners, as coo*ners, sou(ht to
have re(istere the follo*in(-escribe propert$3
A parcel of lan situate in the barrio of Tala"pas, "unicipalit$ of Baliua(, Province of Bulacan, upon *hich are situate three
houses an one ca"arin of li(ht "aterial, havin( a superficial area of 1+ hectares, 1, ares, an ++ centares4 boune on the
north b$ the hi(h*a$ 5calzada6 of Tala"pas an the lans of Rita Rui7 Mateo4 on the east b$ the lans of the sai Rita Rui7
Mateo, )er"ene(ilo Prao, Policarpo e Jesus, an a strea" calle 'apan( Buslut4 on the south b$ the sa"e strea" an
the lans of thecapellania4 an on the *est b$ the strea" calle 'apan( Buslut, an the lans of 0icente e la Cru7, Jose
Ca"acho an %o"in(o Rui7 Mateo.
This parcel of a(ricultural lan is use for the raisin( of rice an su(ar cane an is assesse at 8,,... 9nite 'tates currenc$. The
petition, *hich *as file on the ,:th of %ece"ber, ,-.;, *as acco"panie b$ a plan an technical escription of the above-escribe
parcel of lan.
After hearin( the proofs presente, the court entere, on the ,+th of !ebruar$, ,-.:, a ecree in accorance *ith the provisions of
para(raph ; of section 1< of Act No. -+;, irectin( that the lan escribe in the petitioner be re(istere in the na"es of the four
petitioners, as coo*ners, subject to the usufructuar$ ri(ht of 0icente Re$es, *io*er of Re"eios #re$.
=n the ,;th of June, ,-.:, Anacleto Ratilla e la Cru7 file a "otion in the Court of >an Re(istration as?in( for a revision of the case,
incluin( the ecision, upon the (roun that he is the absolute o*ner of the t*o parcels of lan *hich are escribe in sai "otion, an
*hich, accorin( to his alle(ations, are inclue in the lans ecree to the petitioners. )e alle(e that the ecree of !ebruar$ ,+,
,-.:, *as obtaine "aliciousl$ an frauulentl$ b$ the petitioners, thereb$ eprivin( hi" of sai t*o parcels of lan. )e further alle(e
that he *as the absolute o*ner of the t*o parcels of lan, havin( inherite the" fro" his father, Balo"ero R. e la Cru7, *ho ha a
state (rant for the sa"e. )e therefore as?e, uner the provisions of section /: of the >an Re(istration Act 5No. <-;6, a revision of the
case, an that the sai ecree be "oifie so as to e2clue the t*o parcels of lan escribe in sai "otion. The >an Court upon this
"otion reopene the case, an after hearin( the aitional evience presente b$ both parties, renere, on the +/r of Nove"ber,
,-.:, its ecision "oif$in( the for"er ecree b$ e2cluin( fro" the sa"e the t*o parcels of lan clai"e b$ Anacleto Ratilla e la
Cru7. !ro" this ecision an ju("ent the petitioners appeale an no* insist, first, that the trial court erre in reopenin( the case an
"oif$in( its ecree ate the ,+th of !ebruar$, ,-.:, for the reason that sai ecree *as not obtaine b$ "eans of frau4 an,
secon, that the court erre in holin( that the t*o parcels of lan escribe in the appellee@s "otion are not their propert$.
At *as a(ree b$ counsel that the t*o s"all parcels no* in ispute for"a part of the lan escribe in the petition an *ere inclue in
the ecree of !ebruar$ ,+, ,-.:, an that the petitioners are the o*ners of the re"ainer of the lan escribe in the sai ecree.
The petitioners inherite this lan fro" their parents, *ho acBuire the sa"e, incluin( the t*o s"all parcels in Buestion, b$ purchase,
as is evience b$ a public ocu"ent ate the +;th of Nove"ber, ,:;<, ul$ e2ecute before !rancisco Ariarte, alcalde mayor an
ju(e of the Court of !irst Anstance of the Province of Bulacan.
Balo"ero R. e la Cru7, father of the appellee, obtaine in "arch, ,:-1, a state (rant for several parcels of lan, incluin( the t*o
parcels in Buestion. This (rant *as ul$ inscribe in the ol re(ister of propert$ in Bulacan on the ;th of April of the sa"e $ear.
At is a"itte that at the ti"e the appellants presente their petition in this case the appellee *as occup$in( the t*o parcels of lan no*
in Buestion. At is also a"itte that the na"e of the appellee oes not appear in the sai petition as an occupant of the sai t*o parcels.
The petitioners insist that the appellee *as occup$in( these parcels as their tenant an for this reason the$ i not inclue his na"e in
their petition, as an occupant, *hile the appellee contens that he *as occup$in( the sai parcels as the absolute o*ner uner the
estate (rant b$ inheritance.
The court belo* hel that the failure on the part of the petitioners to inclue the na"e of the appellee in their petition, as an occupant of
these t*o parcels of lan, *as a violation of section +, of Act No. <-;, an that this constitute frau *ithin the "eanin( of section /:
of sai >an Re(istration Act. The trial court further hel that the (rant fro" the estate shoul prevail over the public ocu"ent of
purchase of ,:;<.
The "other of the petitioners ie on Nove"ber ,1, ,::,4 their father ie prior to that ti"e. Manuela, the olest of the petitioners, *as
about si2 $ears of a(e *hen their "other ie. 'o these chilren *ere "inors *hen the father of the appellee obtaine the estate (rant.
=n the ,/th of June, ,::+, Jose #re$, uncle an representative of the petitioners, *ho *ere then "inors, rente the lan o*ne b$ the
petitioners@ ecease parents to one Arineo Jose for a perio of three $ears. =n the +/ of March, ,:-1, the sai Jose #re$, as the
representative of the petitioners, rente the sa"e lan for a perio of si2 $ears to Balo"ero R. e la Cru7, father of the appellee. This
rental contract *as ul$ e2ecute in *ritin(. This lan *as cultivate urin( these si2 $ears b$ Balo"ero R. e la Cru7 an his
chilren, one of *ho" is the appellee. =n the ,<th of %ece"ber, ,-.1, Jose #re$, for hi"self an the other petitioners, rente the
sa"e lan to Estanislao R. e la Cru7 for a perio of t*o $ears. Estanislao e la Cru7 on enterin( into this rental contract *ith Jose
#re$ i so for hi"self an his brothers, one of *ho" is the appellee. Chile the appellee a"its that his father an brother entere into
these rental contracts an i, in fact, cultivate the petitioners@ lan, nevertheless he insists that the t*o s"all parcels in Buestion *ere
not inclue in these contracts. An the rental contract bet*een the uncle of the petitioners an he father of the appellee the lan is not
escribe. An the rental contract bet*een Jose #re$, one of the petitioners, an Estanislao R. e la Cru7, brother of the appellee, the
t*o s"all parcels of lan in Buestion are inclue, accorin( to the escription (iven therein. This *as foun to be true b$ the court
belo*, but the sai court hel that as this contract *as "ae b$ Estanislao R. e la Cru7 it *as not binin( upon Anacleto R. e la
Cru7, the appellee.
The t*o s"all parcels of lan in Buestion *ere purchase b$ the parents of the petitioners in ,:;<, as is evience b$ the public
ocu"ent of purchase an sale of that $ear. The sa"e t*o parcels of lan are inclue in the state (rant issue in favor of Balo"ero
Ratilla e la Cru7 in ,:-1. This (rant *as obtaine after the eath of the petitioners@ parents an *hile the$ *ere "inors. 'o it is clear
that the petitioners honestl$ believe that the appellee *as occup$in( the sai parcels as their lessee at the ti"e the$ presente their
application for re(istration. The$ i not act in ba faith, nor *ith an$ frauulent intent, *hen the$ o"itte to inclue in their application
the na"e of the appellee as one of the occupants of the lan. The$ believe that it *as not necessar$ nor reBuire that the$ inclue in
their application the na"es of their tenants. 9ner these circu"stances, i the court belo* co""it an error in reopenin( this case in
June, ,-.:, after its ecree ha been entere in !ebruar$ of the sa"e $earD
The application for the re(istration is to be in *ritin(, si(ne an s*orn to b$ the applicant, or b$ so"e person ul$ authori7e in his
behalf. At is to contain an accurate escription of the lan. At shall contain the na"e in full an the aress of the applicant, an also the
na"es an aresses of all occupants of lan an of all ajoinin( o*ners, if ?no*n4 an, if not ?no*n, it shall state *hat search has
been "ae to fin the". An the for" of notice (iven b$ statute, *hich shall be s*orn to, the applicant is reBuire to state an set forth
clearl$ all "ort(a(es or encu"brances affectin( sai lan, if an$, the ri(hts an interests, le(al or eBuitable, in the possession,
re"ainer, reversion, or e2pectanc$ of all persons, *ith their na"es in full, to(ether *ith their place of resience an post office
aresses. 9pon receipt of the application the cler? shall cause notice of the fillin( to be publishe t*ice in the =fficial #a7ette. This
publishe notice shall be irecte to all persons appearin( to have an interest in the lan sou(ht to be re(istere an to the ajoinin(
o*ners, an also "to all whom it may concern." An aition to the notice in the =fficial #a7ette the >an Court shall, *ithin seven a$s
after sai publication, cause a cop$ of the notice, in 'panish, to be "aile b$ the cler? to ever$ person na"e in the application *hose
aress is ?no*n4 to cause a ul$ atteste cop$ of the notice, in 'panish, to be poste in a conspicuous place on ever$ parcel of lan
inclue in the application, an in a conspicuous place on the chief "unicipal builin( of the to*n in *hich the lan is situate. The
court "a$ also cause other or further notice of the application to be (iven in such "anner an to such persons as it "a$ ee" proper.
The certificate of the cler? that he has serve the notice as irecte b$ the court b$ publication or "ailin( shall be conclusive proof of
such service. Cithin the ti"e allo*e in the notices, if no person appears an ans*ers, the court "a$ at once, upon "otion of the
applicant, no reason to the contrar$ appearin(, orer a (eneral efault. B$ the escription in the publishe notice Eto all *ho" it "a$
concern,E an b$ e2press provisions of la* Eall the *or are "ae parties efenant an shall be conclue b$ the efault an orer.E Af
the court, after hearin(, fins that the applicant has title, as state in his application, a ecree or re(istration shall be entere.
Ever$ ecree of re(istration shall bin the lan an Buiet title thereto, subject onl$ to the e2ceptions state in the follo*in(
section. At shall be conclusive upon an a(ainst all persons, incluin( the Ansular #overn"ent, an all the branches thereof,
*hether "entione b$ na"e in the application, notice, or citation, or inclue in the (eneral escription "to all whom it may
concern." 'uch ecree shall not be opene b$ reason of the absence, infanc$, or other isabilit$ of an$ person affecte
thereb$, nor b$ an$ proceein(s in an$ court for reversin( ju("ents or ecrees4 subject, ho*ever, to the ri(ht of an$ person
eprive of lan or of an$ estate or interest therein b$ ecree of re(istration obtained by fraud to file in the Court of >an
Re(istration a petition for revie* *ithin one $ear. . . . 5'ec. /: of Act No. <-;.6
The appellee is not inclue in an$ of the e2ceptions na"e in section /: referre to above.
At *ill be seen that the applicant is reBuire to "ention not onl$ the outstanin( interest *hich he a"its but also all clai"s of interest,
thou(h enie b$ hi". B$ e2press provision of la* the *orl are "ae parties efenant b$ the escription in the notice Eto all *ho" it
"a$ concern.E
Althou(h the appellee, occup$in( the t*o s"all parcels of lan in Buestion uner the circu"stances as *e have set forth, *as not
serve *ith notice, he *as "ae a part$ efenant b$ publication4 an the enterin( of a ecree on the ,+th of !ebruar$, ,-.:, "ust be
hel to be conclusive a(ainst all persons, incluin( the appellee, *hether his 5appellee@s6 na"e is "entione in the application, notice,
or citation.
The sai ecree of !ebruar$ ,+, ,-.:, shoul not have been opene on account of the absence, infanc$, or other isabilit$ of an$
person affecte thereb$, an coul have been opene onl$ on the (roun that the sai ecree ha been obtaine b$ frau. That ecree
*as not obtaine b$ frau on the part of the applicants, inas"uch as the$ honestl$ believe that the appellee *as occup$in( these t*o
s"all parcels of lan as their tenant. =ne of the petitioner *ent upon the pre"ises *ith the surve$or *hen the ori(inal plan *as "ae.
Proof of constructive frau is not sufficient to authori7e the Court of >an Re(istration to reopen a case an "oif$ its ecree. 'pecific,
intentional acts to eceive an eprive anther of his ri(ht, or in so"e "anner injure hi", "ust be alle(e an prove4 that is, there "ust
be actual or positive frau as istin(uishe fro" constructive frau.
The Buestion as to the "eanin( of the *or EfrauE in the Australian statutes has been freBuentl$ raise. T*o istinctions have been
note b$ the Australian courts4 the first is the istinction bet*een the "eanin( of the *or EfrauE in the sections relatin( to the
conclusive effect of certificates of title, an its "eanin( in the sections relatin( to the protection of bona fie purchasers fro" re(istere
proprietors. The secon is the istinction bet*een Ele(al,E EeBuitable,E or EconstructiveE frau, an EactualE or E"oralE frau. An none of
the (roups of the sections of the Australian statutes relatin( to the conclusive effect of certificates of title, an in *hich frau is referre
to, is there an$ e2press inication of the "eanin( of Efrau,E *ith the sole e2ception of that of the 'outh Australian (roup. 5)o(( on
Australian Torrens '$ste", p. :/<.6
Cith re(ar to ecisions on the sections relatin( to the conclusive effect of certificates of title, it has been hel in so"e cases
that the EfrauE there "entione "eans actual or "oral frau, not "erel$ constructive or le(al frau. An other cases EfrauE has
been sai to inclue constructive, le(al, an ever$ ?in of frau. An other cases, a(ainst, ?no*le(e of other persons@ ri(ht,
an the eliberate acBuisition of re(istere title in the face of such ?no*le(e, has been hel to be EfrauE *hich renere
voiable the certificates of title so obtaine4 an voluntar$ i(norance is, for this purpose, the sa"e as ?no*le(e. But in none
of these three classes of cases *as there absent the ele"ent of intention to eprive another of just ri(hts, *hich constitutes
the essential characteristics of actual F as istin(uishe fro" le(al-frau. 5Id., p. :/1, an cases cite in notes Nos. :1, :;,
:G, ::, an :- at botto" of pa(es :/1 an :/;.6
B$ EfrauE is "eant actual frau-ishonest$ of so"e sort. 5Ju("ent of Priv$ Council in Assets Co. vs. Mere Roihi, an Assets Co. vs.
Panapa Caihopi, ecie in March, ,-.1, cite b$ )o(( in his 'upple"entar$ Aenu" to his *or? on Australian Torrens
'$ste", supra.6 The sa"e "eanin( shoul be (iven to the *or EfrauE use in section /: of our statutes 5Act No. <-;6.
The Buestion as to *hether an$ particular transaction sho*s frau, *ithin the "eanin( of the *or as use in our statutes, *ill in each
case be a Buestion of fact. Ce *ill not atte"pt to sa$ *hat acts *oul constitutes this ?in of frau in other cases. This "ust be
eter"ine fro" the fact an circu"stances in each particular case. The onl$ Buestion *e are calle upon to eter"ine, an have
eter"ine, is *hether or not, uner the facts an circu"stances in this case, the petitioners i obtain the ecree of !ebruar$ ,+,
,-.:, b$ "eans of frau.
At "i(ht be ur(e that the appellee has been eprive of his propert$ *ithout ue process of la*, in violation of section 1 of the Act of
Con(ress of Jul$ ,, ,-.+, ?no*n as the Philippine Bill,E *hich provies Ethat no la* shall be enacte in the sai Aslans *hich shall
eprive an$ person of life, libert$, or propert$ *ithout ue process of la*.E
The >an Re(istration Act reBuires that all occupants be na"e in the petition an (iven notice b$ re(istere "ail. This i not o the
appellee an$ (oo, as he *as not notifie4 but he *as "ae a part$ efenant, as *e have sai, b$ "eans of the publication Eto all
*ho" it "a$ concern.E Af this section of the Act is to be uphel this "ust be eclare to be ue process of la*.
Before e2a"inin( the valiit$ of this part of the Act it "i(ht be *ell to note the histor$ an purpose of *hat is ?no*n as the ETorrens
>an Re(istration '$ste".E This s$ste" *as introuce in 'outh Australia b$ 'ir Robert Torrens in ,:1G an *as there *or?e out in
its practicable for".
The "ain principle of re(istration is to "a?e re(istere titles inefeasible. As *e have sai, upon the presentation in the Court of >an
Re(istration of an application for the re(istration of the title to lans, uner this s$ste", the theor$ of the la* is that all occupants,
ajoinin( o*ners, averse clai"ants, an other intereste persons are notifie of the proceein(s, an have have a ri(ht to appear in
opposition to such application. An other *ors, the proceein( is a(ainst the *hole *or. This s$ste" *as evientl$ consiere b$ the
>e(islature to be a public project *hen it passe Act No. <-;. The interest of the co""unit$ at lar(e *as consiere to be preferre to
that of private iniviuals.
At the close of this nineteenth centur$, all civili7e nations are co"in( to re(istration of title to lan, because i""ovable
propert$ is beco"in( "ore an "ore a "atter of co""ercial ealin(, an there can be no trae *ithout securit$. 5%u"as@s
>ectures, p. +/.6
The re(istere proprietor *ill no lon(er have reasons to fear that he "a$ evicte because his venor ha, un?no*n to hi",
alrea$ sol the an to a thir person. . . The re(istere proprietor "a$ feel hi"self protecte a(ainst an$ efect in his
venor@s title. 5Id., p. +,.6
The follo*in( su""ar$ of benefits of the s$ste" of re(istration of titles, "ae b$ 'ir Robert Torrens, has been full$ justifie in
its use3
!irst. At has substitute securit$ for insecurit$.
'econ. At has reuce the costs of conve$ances fro" pouns to shillin(s, an the ti"e occupie fro" "onths to a$s.
Thir. At has e2chan(e brevit$ an clearness for obscurit$ an verbia(e.
!ourth. At has so si"plifie orinar$ ealin(s that he *ho has "astere the Ethree R@sE can transact his o*n conve$ancin(.
!ifth. At affors protection a(ainst frau.
'i2th. At has restore to their just value "an$ estates hel uner (oo holin( titles, but epreciate in conseBuence of so"e
blur or technical efect, an has barre the reoccurrence of an$ si"ilar faults. 5'helon on >an Re(istration, pp. G1, G;.6
The bolest effort to (rapple *ith the proble" of si"plification of title to lan *as "ae b$ Mr. 5after*ars 'ir Robert6 Torrens,
a la$"an, in 'outh Australia in ,:1G. . . . An the Torrens s$ste" title by registrationta?es the place of "title by deeds" of the
s$ste" uner the E(eneralE la*. A sale of lan, for e2a"ple, is effecte b$ a re(istere transfer, upon *hich a certificate of title
is issue. The certificate is (uarantee b$ statute, an, *ith certain e2ceptions, constitutes inefeasible title to the lan
"entione therein. 9ner the ol s$ste" the sa"e sale *oul be effecte b$ a conve$ance, epenin( for its valiit$, apart
fro" intrinsic fla*s, on the correctness of a lon( series of prior ees, *ills, etc. . . . The object of the Torrens s$ste", the", is
to o a*a$ *ith the ela$, uncertaint$, an e2pense of the ol conve$ancin( s$ste". 5%uff$ H Ea(leson on The Transfer of
>an Act, ,:-., pp. +, /, 1, G.6
B$ ETorrensE s$ste" (enerall$ are "eant those s$ste"s of re(istration of transactions *ith interest in lan *hose eclare
object . . . is, uner (overn"ental authorit$, to establish an certif$ to the o*nership of an absolute an inefeasible title to
realt$, an to si"plif$ its transfer. 5)o(( on Australian Torrens s$ste", supra, pp. ,, +.6
Co"pensation for errors fro" assurance funs is provie in all countries in *hich the Torrens s$ste" has been enacte. Cases of
error no oubt *ill al*a$s occur. The percenta(e of errors, as co"pare *ith the nu"ber of re(istere ealin(s in Australia, is ver$
s"all. An Ne* 'outh Cales there *ere, in ,::-, +.-, :-< re(istere ealin(s, the avera(e ris? of error bein( onl$ + I cents for each
ealin(. An Jueenslan the ris? of error *as onl$ , I cents, the nu"ber of re(istere ealin(s bein( +//,/.-. An Tas"ania an in
Cestern Australia not a cent *as pai for co"pensation for errors urin( the *hole ti"e of operation, 5%u"as@s >ectures, supra, p. -;.6
This s$ste" has been aopte in various countries of the civili7e *orl, incluin( so"e of the 'tates of the A"erican 9nion, an
practical e2perience has e"onstrate that it has been successful as a public project.
The valiit$ of so"e of the provisions of the statutes aoptin( the Torrens s$ste" has been the subject of juicial ecision in the courts
of the 9nite 'tates. 5People vs. Chase, ,;1 All., 1+G4 'tate vs. #uilbert, 1; =hio 't., 1G14 People vs. 'i"on, ,G; All., ,;14 T$ler vs.
Ju(es, ,G1 Mass., G,.6
Act No. <-; of the Philippine Co""ission, ?no*n as the E>an Re(istration Act,E *as copie substantiall$ fro" the Massachussetts la*
of ,:-:.
The Allinois an Massachusetts statutes *ere uphel b$ the supre"e courts of those 'tates.
At is not enou(h to sho* a proceure to be unconstitutional to sa$ that *e never hear of it before. 5T$lervs. Ju(es, supra4
)urtao vs. California, ,,. 9. '., 1,;.6
>oo?e at either fro" the point of vie* of histor$ or of the necessar$ reBuire"ents of justice, a proceein(in rem ealin( *ith a
tan(ible res "a$ be institute an carrie to ju("ent *ithout personal service upon clai"ants *ithin the 'tate or notice b$
na"e to those outsie of it, an not encounter an$ provision of either constitution. Jurisiction is secure b$ the po*er of the
court over the res. As *e have sai, such a proceein( *oul be i"possible, *ere this not so, for it harl$ *oul o to "a?e a
istinction bet*een the constitutional ri(hts of clai"ants *ho *ere ?no*n an those *ho *ere not ?no*n to the plaintiff, *hen
the proceein( is to bar all. 5T$ler vs. Ju(es, supra.6
This sa"e octrine is annunciate in Penno$er vs. Neff 5-1 9. '., G,<64 The Mar$ 5- Cranch, ,+;64 Man?in vs. Chanler 5+ Broc?.,
,+164 Bro*n vs. >evee Co""ission 51. Miss., <;:64 + !ree"an, Ju("ents, <th e., secs. ;.;, ;,,.
Af the technical object of the suit is to establish a clai" a(ainst so"e particular person, *ith a ju("ent *hich (enerall$, in
theor$ at least, bins his bo$, or to bar so"e iniviual clai" or objection, so that onl$ certain persons are entitle to be
hear in efense, the action is in personam, althou(h it "a$ concern the ri(ht to or possession of a tan(ible thin(. Af, on the
other han, the object is to bar inifferentl$ all *ho "i(ht be "ine to "a?e an objection of an$ sort a(ainst the ri(ht sou(ht
to be establishe, an if an$one in the *orl has a ri(ht to be hear on the stren(ht of alle(in( facts *hich, if true, sho* an
inconsistent interest, the proceein( is in rem. 5T$ler vs. Ju(es, supra.6
An the case of )a"ilton vs. Bro*n 5,;, 9. '., +1;6 a ju("ent of escheat *as hel conclusive upon persons notifie b$ avertise"ent
to all persons intereste. An this jurisiction, b$ the provisions of the Coe of Civil Proceure, Act No. ,-., a ecree allo*in( or
isallo*in( a *ill bins ever$bo$, althou(h the onl$ notice of the proceein(s (iven is b$ (eneral notice to all persons intereste.
The supre"e court Massachusetts, in the case of T$ler vs. Ju(es 5supra6, i not rest its ju("ent as to the conclusive effect of the
ecree upon the (roun that the 'tate has absolute po*er to eter"ine the persons to *ho" a "an@s propert$ shall (o at his eath,
but upon the characteristics of a proceein( in rem. 'o *e conclue that the proceein(s ha in the case at bar, uner all the facts an
circu"stances, especiall$ the absolute lac? on the part of the petitioners of an$ ishonest intent to eprive the appellee of an$ ri(ht, or
in an$ *a$ injure hi", constitute ue process of la*.
As to *hether or not the appellee can succesfull$ "aintain an action uner the provisions of sections ,., an ,.+ of the >an
Re(istration Act 5secs. +/;1, +/;;, Co"pilation6 *e o not ecie.
!or these reasons *e are of the opinion, an so hol, that the ju("ent appeale fro" shoul be, an the sa"e is hereb$ reverse
an ju("ent entere in favor of the petitioners in confor"it$ *ith the ecree of the lo*er court of !ebruar$ ,+, ,-.:, *ithout special
rulin( as to costs. At is so orere.
Arellano, .!., "orres, !ohnson and #oreland, !!., concur.