NICOLAS vs.

PRE
G.R. No. L-7402
October 27, 1955

FACTS:

Domingo Nicolas filed an application for registration of a parcel of land located in Sta.
Ignacia, Tarlac, but it was opposed by Ulysses Pre et al. claiming to be the owners of the portion
of land. After the presentation of evidence the court rendered judgment declaring appellees
owners of the portion of land claimed by them in their opposition and decreed the registration of
the said portion of land under their name, this decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The
appellant filed again in the Court of First Instance of Tarlac a complaint praying that the judgment
rendered in a registration case be declared null and void for having been rendered in excess of
jurisdiction and in violation of Constitution. The defendant Pre filed a motion to dismiss the case
and it was sustained and the case was dismissed. Plaintiff Nicolas brought the case before the
Supreme Court on plea that the questions involved are purely legal.

ISSUE: Whether or not the lower court has the jurisdiction in ordering the registration of land
under the name of Ulysses Pre et al.?

RULING:

Before the amendment of Act 496 the purpose of an answer for registration case was
simply to decide the oppositor objection to application or his reasons showing why the applicant
should be denied the relief applied for. The oppositor could not ask for any affirmative relief or that
the land be registered in his name in the same proceedings it being the sole purpose of the same
to prevent the registration of the land in the name of the applicant. The power of the Court was
limited to determining whether the applicant had a title proper for registration. After its amendment
by Act No. 3621 on 1929 the procedure was changed in the sense of allowing the oppositor not
only to allege in his answer his objections to the applicant but to ask for any affirmative relief he
may desire. Under the amendment an oppositor who claims ownership over the property covered
by the application, or a part thereof, may now claim in his answer that the land be registered in
his name in the same proceedings. The Court affirmed the decision of the lower court in ordering
the registration of land under the name of Ulysses Pre et al.