LICOTEDRA PARCOTILO,et.al. vs. FILOMENA PARCOTILO,et.al., G.R. NO.

L-17249, November 28, 1964 FACTS: Spouses Pablo and Filomena Parcotilo owned 2 parcels of land. Upon their death, their nephew, defendant Demetrio Parcotilo, transferred the tax declarations of the properties in his name, by virtue of the donation made in his favour by the spouses. Plaintiffs, who are also nephews and nieces of Pablo, filed an action for partition of the parcels of land left by the former, claiming that they are co-heirs of Defendant Demetrio and are also entitled to his estate. The CFI dismissed the complaint. It found out that Spouses Pablo and Filomena executed a testament in 1917 bequeathing the subject lands to Demetrio. Although the testament lacks the legal requisites, it is nevertheless a good ground on which to base acquisitive prescription. It noted that Defendant Demetrio asserted ownership of the land in question without anybody raising any protest. Plaintiffs had the right to demand their shares to the land in question if they acted promptly before the period of prescription had elapsed. ISSUE: Whether or not Defendant had validly acquired ownership over the land through adverse possession. HELD: The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court holding that Defendant Demetrio had validly acquired ownership over the land by acquisitive prescription. While the testament made in favor of said defendant did not have the requisites of law, said document supplied the basis for the claim of ownership by Demetrio. This claim coupled by his actual, open, continuous, and adverse possession for a period of 38 years had ripened into a title by prescription. Even Art. 1137 of the NCC on extraordinary prescription through uninterrupted adverse possession for 30 years regardless of whether there was title or good faith, uphold the the right of Demetrio as owner through adverse possession.