DIRECTOR OF LANDS VS COURT OF APPEALS
FACTS:
Private respondents Ibarra and Amelia Bisnar claimed to be the owners in fee simple of 2 parcel
of lands in Capiz, in their joint application for land registration. The applicants alleged that they inherited
those parcels of land and that they are paying taxes. However, the Director of Lands and the Director of
the Bureau of Forest Developments opposed the application on the grounds that:
1. Neither the applicants nor their predecessors-in-interest possess sufficient title to acquire
ownership in fee simple of the land or lots applied for, the same not having been acquired by any of
the various types of title issued by the Spanish Government, such as, (1) 'titulo real' or royal grant,
(2) the 'concession especial' or special grant, (3) the 'composicion con el estado titulo' or adjustment
title, (4) the 'titulo de compra 'or title by purchase, and (5) the 'informacion possessoria' or
possessory information under the Royal Decree of 13 February 1894, or any other recognized mode
of acquisition of title over realty under pertinent applicable laws.
2. Neither the applicants nor their predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive
and notorious possession and occupation of the land in question for at least thirty (30) years
immediately preceding the filing of the application.
3. The properties in question are a portion of the public domain belonging to the Republic of the Philippines,
not subject to private appropriation.
The applicants then filed an amended application for the benefits of Chapter 8,
Commonwealth Act 141 as they and their predecessors-in-interest have been in possession of the
land as owners for more than fifty (50) years, which was approved by the trial court and ordered the
registration of the title of the lots in the names of the private respondents. It found that applicants
and their predecessors- in-interest have been in open, public, continuous, peaceful and adverse
possession of the subject parcels of land under bona fide claims of ownership for more than eighty
(80) years (not only 30) prior to the filing of the application for registration, introduced improvements
on the lands by planting coconuts, bamboos and other plants, and converted a part of the land into
productive fishponds.
The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's decision. It held that the classification of the lots
as timberland by the Director of Forestry cannot prevail in the absence of proof that the said lots are
indeed more valuable as forest land than as agricultural land, citing as authority the case of Ankron
vs. Government of the Philippine Islands (40 Phil. 10). In this petition, the government alleges that:
1. the classification or reclassification of public lands into alienable or disposable agricultural land,
mineral land or forest land is a prerogative of the Executive Department of the government and not
of the courts;
2. that possession of forest lands, no matter how long, cannot ripen into private ownership; and
3. that an applicant for registration of title has the burden of proving that he meets the requirements
of sec 48 of Commonwealth Act 141, as amended.
ISSUE:
WON the lots in question may be registered under sec 48 of Commonwealth Act 141.
HELD:
No.
As provided for under Section 6 of Commonwealth Act 141, which was lifted from Act 2874,
the classification or reclassification of public lands into alienable or disposable, mineral or forest
lands is now a prerogative of the Executive Department of the government and not the courts. With
these rules, there should be no more room for doubt that it is not the court which determines the
classification of lands of the public domain into agricultural, forest or mineral but the Executive
Branch of the government, through the Office of the President.
It bears emphasizing that a positive act of the government is needed to declassify land which
is classified as forest and to convert it into alienable or disposable land for agricultural or other
purposes. Unless and until the land classified as forest is released in an official proclamation to that
effect so that it may form part of the disposable agricultural lands of the public domain, the rules on
confirmation of imperfect title do not apply. Thus, possession of forest lands, however long, cannot
ripen into private ownership.
In confirmation of imperfect title cases, the applicant shoulders the burden of proving that he
meets the requirements of Section 48, Commonwealth Act No. 141, as amended by Republic Act
1942. He must overcome the presumption that the land he is applying for is part of the public domain
but that he has an interest therein sufficient to warrant registration in his name because of an
imperfect title such as those derived from old Spanish grants or that he has had continuous, open
and notorious possession and occupation of agricultural lands of the public domain under a bona
fide claim of acquisition of ownership for at least thirty (30) years preceding the filing of his
application.
