Republic vs.

Vera, 120 SCRA 210

Doctrine: A land subjected to cadastral adjudication under the Land
Registration Act cannot be subject to registration by voluntary proceedings, exc
ept where the applicant can still petition for judicial confirmation of imperfec
t title.

Facts:
These case involves two petitions for review.

G.R. No. L-35778

Respondent Luisito Martinez filed with the lower court of Bataan an application
for registration under Act No. 496 of one parcel of land situated in Mariveles,
Bataan. The Republic opposed the application claiming that the aforementioned pa
rcel of land is a portion of the public domain, thus not subject to private appr
opriation. Commission of Land Registration (LRC) issued a certificate that such
land is inside Lot 626 of the Cadastral Survey of Mariveles.

G.R. No. L-35779

Respondent Thelma Tanalega filed an application for registration before the same
court for two parcels of land described as portions of Lot 626 of the Mariveles
Cadastre. The Chief Surveyor of LRC filed a report in the lower court that such
parcels of land do not appear to have been passed upon and approved by the Dire
ctor of Lands, and further examination will be conducted in order to determine w
hether or not a patent or title has been issued in order to avoid duplication or
overlapping of titles.
The Republic opposed the registration claiming that the land applied for are por
tions of the public domain thus not subject to private appropriation.

***********************
In both cases, the lower court ruled in favor of applicants Martinez and Tanaleg
a, hence this petition. Republic argued that Mariveles Cadastre was declared pub
lic land by the decision of the Cadastral Court in 1937, thus the lower court is
without jurisdiction over the subject matter for voluntary registration under A
ct 496. The Republic also claimed that the lands in question can no longer be su
bject to registration by voluntary proceedings, for they have already been subje
cted to compulsory registration proceedings under the Cadastral Act.

Issue:
W/N lower court has jurisdiction over application of registration of land which
was already subjected to cadastral registration.

Held:

NO, the lower court does not have jurisdiction. In cadastral proceedings any per
son claiming any interest in any part of the land object of the petition is requ
ired by Act No. 2259 to file an answer on or before the return date or within su
ch time as may be allowed by court. In the instant cases, private respondents ap
parently either did not file their answers in the cadastral proceedings or faile
d to substantiate their claims over the portions they were then occupying. The C
adastral Court must have declared the lands in question public lands, and its de
cision had already become final and conclusive.

Respondents are now barred by prior judgment to assert their rights over the sub
ject land, under the doctrine of res judicata. A cadastral proceeding

is one in rem and binds the whole world. Under this doctrine, parties are preclu
ded from re-litigating the same issues already determined by final judgment.

Even granting that respondents can still petition for judicial confirmation of i
mperfect title, the same must necessarily fail. In the instant cases, evidence f
or the respondents themselves tend to show that only portions of the entire area
applied for are cultivated. Mere cultivation of portions of land does not const
itute possession under claim of ownership.

In addition, the survey plans submitted by private respondents were not approved
by the Director of Lands but by the Land Registration Commission (LRC). The LRC
has no authority to approve original survey plans. The submission of the plan i
s a statutory requirement of mandatory character and unless the plan and its tec
hnical descriptions are duly approved the by the Director of Lands, the same are
not of much value.

* Respondents should have filed a petition to reopen the cadastral case under RA
931.