CEBU OXYGEN & ACETYLENE CO., INC.

V BERCILLES
G.R. L-40474, August 29, 1975

Recit-Ready Case Summary: Peralta-Labrador filed a case for recovery of possession and ownership with the MTC of San Felipe
Zambales against Bugarin, whom she says has been in unlawful possession of her lot. The Court stated that since she filed the case
two years after she learned of Bugarin’s possession of the lot, it should have been filed with the RTC for a different cause of action. Her
action for forcible entry had prescribed after the one-year mark, and is not eligible for a summary proceeding anymore.

General Rule of Law/Doctrine:

 Authority of city council to close city streets and to vacate or withdraw the same from public use discretionary.
 Property of public dominion withdrawn from public use becomes patrimonial property.
 Patrimonial property can be the object of an ordinary contract.

FACTS: The parcel of land sought to be registered was originally a portion of M. Borces Street Mabolo, Cebu City
 Sept 23, 1968 – City Council of Cebu (Res. No. 2163 approved on 10/3/68) declared the terminal portion of land as an
abandoned road, the same not being included in the City Development Plan.
 Dec 19, 1968 – City Council (Res No 2755) authorized the Acting City Mayor to sell thru public bidding.
 Marc 3, 1969 – Petitioner was the highest bidder. City of Cebu executed a deed of absolute sale with total consideration of
P10,800.00. Petitioner filed application with the CFI of Cebu to have its title to the land registered.
 Jun 26, 1974 – Assistant Provincial Fiscal of Cebu filed a motion to dismiss the application – because public road intendedfor
public use (public domain and outside commerce of man; cannot be owned by a private individual)
 Oct 11, 1974 – Dismissed the application for registration of the title.

ISSUE: WON petitioner can own and register the land in their name?

HELD: YES. The city council is the authority competent to determine whether or not a certain property is still necessary for public use.
Such power to vacate a street or alley is discretionary. And the discretion will not ordinarily be controlled or interfered with by the courts,
absent a plain case of abuse or fraud or collusion. Faithfulness to the public trust will be presumed. So the fact that some private
interests may be served incidentally will not invalidate the vacation ordinance. Article 422 of the Civil Code expressly provides that
“Property of public dominion, when no longer intended for public use or for public service, shall form part of the patrimonial property of
the State.” Besides, the Revised Charter of the City of Cebu heretofore quoted, in very clear and unequivocal terms, states that:
“Property thus withdrawn from public servitude may be used or conveyed for any purpose for which other real property belonging to the
City may be lawfully used or conveyed.” Since that portion of the city street subject of petitioner’s application for registration of
title was withdrawn from public use, it follows that such withdrawn portion becomes patrimonial property which can be the
object of an ordinary contract.

1
PROPERTY - Ness