mDirector of Lands v.

Abelardo
Facts:
The case revolves around proving the ownership of 2
parcels of lands, which were properties subject in a
successional litigation. Siblings Fulgencia and Jose
Dino are contesting the ownership of subject
properties in Manuel Libunaos possession. They
further claim that as deaf-mutes, they should not be
barred by prescription in filing the case.
Issue:
Whether or not the prescription period in filing the
case should be relaxed due to their being deafmutes.
Held:
No, they are not. The SC ruled that the subject lands
are still and should still be owned by Manuel Libuano
and family due to the following reasons (1) the
preponderance of evidence as to the ownership of
the lands are in favor of Libunao, (2) the action for
filing a claim regarding the partition of the estate has
already prescribed.
Being a deaf-mute is not by itself alone, without the
concurrence of any of the incapacities recognized by
law, considered included among the exceptions
which in matters of prescription, are granted to
incapacitated persons, in connection with the
running of the prescriptive period.