Registration Under CA No.

141 (Public Land Act) Nov 7, 1936

1. Sec. 2 – Coverage; Exceptions (2) By sale;
(3) By lease;
(4) By confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles:
SECTION 2. The provisions of this Act shall apply to the lands of the public domain; but timber and (a) By judicial legalization;
mineral lands shall be governed by special laws and nothing in this Act provided shall be understood or (b) By administrative legalization (free patent).
construed to change or modify the administration and disposition of the lands commonly called "friar
lands" and those which, being privately owned, have reverted to or become the property of the Notes:
Commonwealth of the Philippines, which administration and disposition shall be governed by the laws
at present in force or which may hereafter be enacted

3. Sec. 48(b), CA No. 141

2. Sec. 3 (Secretary); Sec. 4 (Director of Lands); Sec. 6; Sec. 8 (Official Classification); Sec.
11 (Disposition: 4 ways: homestead settlement; sale; lease; judicial confirmation (judicial
and administrative)
SECTION 3. The Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce shall be the executive officer charged with
carrying out the provisions of this Act through the Director of Lands, who shall act under his immediate
control.
SECTION 4. Subject to said control, the Director of Lands shall have direct executive control of the
survey, classification, lease, sale or any other form of concession or disposition and management of the
lands of the public domain, and his decisions as to questions of fact shall be conclusive when approved
by the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce.
CHAPTER II
Classification, Delimitation, and Survey of Lands of the Public Domain, for the Concession
Thereof
SECTION 6. The President, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture and
Commerce, shall from time to time classify the lands of the public domain into —
(a) Alienable or disposable,
(b) Timber, and
(c) Mineral lands,
and may at any time and in a like manner transfer such lands from one class to another, for the
purposes of their administration and disposition.
SECTION 8. Only those lands shall be declared open to disposition or concession which have been
officially delimited and classified and, when practicable, surveyed, and which have not been reserved
for public or quasi-public uses, nor appropriated by the Government, nor in any manner become
private property, nor those on which a private right authorized and recognized by this Act or any other
valid law may be claimed, or which, having been reserved or appropriated, have ceased to be so.
However, the President may, for reasons of public interest, declare lands of the public domain open to
disposition before the same have had their boundaries established or been surveyed, or may, for the
same reason, suspend their concession or disposition until they are again declared open to concession
or disposition by proclamation duly published or by Act of the National Assembly. c
CHAPTER III
Forms of Concession of Agricultural Lands
SECTION 11. Public lands suitable for agricultural purposes can be disposed of only as follows, and
not otherwise:
(1) For homestead settlement;
a. Requisites – same as Sec. 14(1), PRD
Notes:
Two modes of disposing public lands through confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles:
1. By Judicial Confirmation (Substantive provisions is governed by Chapter VII (Secs. 45
- 57) of the Public Land Act. Procedural aspect is governed by Chapter III (Secs. 14 -
38) of the Property Registration Decree)
2. By administrative legalization, otherwise known as the grant of free patents.
Sec. 14(1)
Section 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file in the proper Court of First Instance an
application for registration of title to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized
representatives:
(1) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable
lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or
earlier.
Notes:
Requisites/ Required under Sec. 14(1):
1. The land applied for is an agricultural pubic land already classified as alienable and
disposable land at the time of the filing of the application for registration
2. The applicant himself has been in OCENPO under bona fide claim of ownership
3. Such possession and occupation must commenced since June 12, 1945
b. No material difference between Sec. 14(1) of PD No. 1529 and Sec. 48(b) of
CA No. 141
Notes:
Sec. 14(1) in relation to Sec 48(b) specifies identical requirements for the judicial confirmation
of “imperfect” titles:
1. That the subject land forms part of the alienable and disposable land of the public
domain;
2. That the applicants, by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, have
been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of the
subject land under a bona fide claim of ownership; and
3. That such possession and occupation must be since June 12, 1945

LTD | Sept 25 | 1

Sec. 48(b) in conjunction with Section 11 of the Public Land Act primarily establishes the
substantive ownership of the possessor who has been in possession of the since June 12, 1945. In
turn, Section 14(1) of the Property Registration Decree recognizes the substantive right
granted under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act, and provides the corresponding original
registration procedure for the judicial confirmation of an imperfect or incomplete title.
4. Vested Rights, including those acquired under RA No. 1942 (30 years possession) not be
impaired by PD No. 1073 (requiring possession since June 12, 1945)
Notes:
In Abejaron v. Nabasa, the court states that:
● However, as petitioner Abejaron’s 30-year period of “possession and occupation
required by the Public Land Act, as amended by R.A. 1942 ran from 1945 to 1975,
prior to the effectivity of P.D. No. 1073 in 1977, the requirement of said P.D. that
occupation and possession should have started on June 12, 1945 or earlier, does not
apply to him. As the Susi doctrine holds that the grant of title by virtue of Sec. 48(b)
takes place by operation of law, then upon Abejaron’s satisfaction of the
requirements of this law, he would have already gained title over the disputed land in
1975. This follows the doctrine laid down in Director of Lands v. Intermediate
Appellate Court, Et Al., 45 that the law cannot impair vested rights such as a land
grant. More clearly stated, "Filipino citizens who by themselves or their
predecessors-in-interest have been, prior to the effectivity of P.D. 1073 on January
25, 1977, in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of
agricultural lands of the public domain, under a bona fide claim of acquisition of
ownership, for at least 30 years, or at least since January 24, 1947" may apply for
judicial confirmation of their imperfect or incomplete title under Sec. 48(b) of the
Public Land Act.”
Abejeron was reiterated in Republic v. Espinosa:
● Consequently, for one to invoke Section 48(b) and claim an imperfect title over an
alienable and disposable land of the public domain on the basis of a thirty (30)-year
possession and occupation, it must be demonstrated that such possession and
occupation commenced on January 24, 1947 and the thirty (30)-year period was
completed prior to the effectivity of P.D. No. 1073.
a. RA No. 9176 extended the period to file application to December 31, 2020
○ On November 13, 2002, RA 9176 was enacted: a) extending the period to
file an application for judicial confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles
to December 31, 2020; b) further limiting the are applied for to 12
hectares; and c) providing that all pending applications filed before the
effectivity before the amendatory Act shall be treated as having been filed
in accordance with the provision thereof.
○ The extension of the period fixed by law for the filing of the application for
registration is not jurisdictional but is more of a time limitation.
b. Judicial proceeding for due process
○ Registration proceeding presupposes that the land is public agricultural
land.
○ The certificate of title is void when it covers property of public domain
classified as forest or timber and mineral lands. Any title issued on non-
disposable lots even in the hands of an alleged innocent purchaser for
value, shall be cancelled. Where the trial court, in granting registration,
counted the period of possession of private respondents before the same
were released as forest lands for disposition, such release is tantamount to
qualifying the latter to a grant on said lands while they were still non-
disposable. Thus, even assuming that the transferees are innocent
purchaser for value, their titles to said lands derived from the titles of
private respondent which were not validly issued as they cover lands still a
part of public domain, may be cancelled.
○ A different rule obtains for lands which are incapable of registration as
when they belong to the category of forest or timber, mineral lands, and
national parks. Under the Constitution, only agricultural lands may be
subject to alienation..
○ The rule on confirmation of imperfect title does not apply unless and until
the land classified as, say ,forest land is released in an official proclamation
to that effect so that it may form part of the disposable agricultural lands of
public domain.
○ When the conditions in Sec. 48(b) are complied with, the possessor is
deemed to have acquired, by operation of law, a right to grant, without
the necessity of a certificate of title being issued. The land, therefore,
ceases to be of public domain, and beyond the authority of the Director to
dispose of.
5. Compliance with all requirements - Ipso Jure Conversion to Private Land
Applicants for confirmation of imperfect title must, therefore, prove the following:
(a) that the land forms part of the disposable and alienable agricultural lands of the
public domain; and
(b) that they have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and
occupation of the same under a bona fide claim of ownership either since time
immemorial or since 12 June 1945. (Republic v. Alconaba)
● The case of Suzi v. Razon affirmed and reaffirmed that the doctrine that open,
exclusive and undisputed possession of alienable public land for the period
prescribed by law creates the legal fiction whereby the land, upon completion of the
requisite period, ipso jure and without the need of judicial or other sanction, ceases to
be public land and becomes private property.
● Oh Cho v. Director of lands
○ SC categorically recognizing an exception to the rule that the lands that
were not acquired from government, either by purchase or grant belong to
public domain
○ Exception; “would be any land that should have been in the possession of
the occupant and of his predecessors-in-interest since time immemorial,
for such possession would justify the presumption that the land had never
been part of the public domain or that it had been private property even
before the Spanish conquest.
○ Carino v. Insular US SC institutionalized the concept of native title or
ownership of Filipinos by virtue of possession under a claim of ownership
since time immemorial and independent of any grant from Spanish Crown
■ XPN to Jura Regalia
○ However in the case of Oh Cho v. Director of lands, the applicant failed to
show that he has title to the lot that may be registered.
○ Failed to show He or any predecessors-in-interest had acquired the land
from:
LTD | Sept 25 | 2
 ■ government than 30 years.
■ Law orders, decrees from Spanish government ● SC ruled: Zara’s imperfect possessory turtle over the land was not disturbed by such
■ Possessory information under Mortgage law (Sec. 19 Act 469) declaration of the court because the proceeding contemplated in CA 141
○ The first possessor-in-interest had possession of the lot began in 1880. presupposes that the land is public. The basis of the decree of judicial confirmation
Thus, not entitled to a decree of registration under CA 141. authorized therien is not the land is already privately owned and hence no longer part
○ Also, he was an alien which makes him disqualified from acquiring lands of of the public domain but rather that by reason of the claimants possession for 30
public domain. years he is conclusively presumed to have performed all the conditions essential to a
● Mesina v. Sonza government grant.
○ Mesina claimed the he was the owner of a lot, he had actual possession ● Notes; Diaz v. Republic, SC ruled that the registration cases filed under PLA for judicial
since 1914, publicly, openly, peacefully, and against the whole world confirmation of an incomplete and imperfect title. An order dismissing the application
○ In 1953, the director of land, issues an homestead patent in favor of Sonza for registration and declaration that land is part of public domain constitutes res
despite not having complied with the requirements in CA 141. judicata not only to the adverse claimant but also against all persons.
○ Director of land had no authority or jurisdiction to issue a patent covering
the land because it is the private property of Mesina.
○ Sc reversed the order of dismissal citing the case of Susi v. Razon, which
held that where all the necessary requirements for the grant by the
government are compiled though actual physical possession openly,
continuously and publicly, with a right to a certificate of title to the said
land under Chapter VII of ACt 2874 amending Act 926., the possessor is
deemed to have already acquired by operation of law a grant of the
government.
○ It is not necessary that the certificate of title be issued in order that said
grant be sanctioned by the courts as an application thereof is sufficient.

Application must conform to the requirement of PRD

● Sec. 50 of PLA requires that every person claim any lands or interest in the lands
under Chapter VII must in every case present an application to the RTC praying that
the validity of the alleged title in inquired into
● Application must confirm with the requirements of application for registration under
Sec. 15
Hearing
● Application for the registration under Chapter VIII of PLA shlla be heard RTC or in
proper cases at first level court, in the same manner and shall be subject to the same
procedure as established in PRD
● Notice together with a plant of lands claimed are forwarded to the Director of lands
● Prior to the publication of the hearing, all the papers in the said case shall be
transmitted to the clerk to the Solicitor General or its officer, if he deems it advisable
for the interest of the government, investigate all of the facts alleged in the
application.
Order for the issuance of the decree
● Whenever any judgment of confirmation or other decree of the court under Chapter
VIII of PLA shall become final, clerk of court shall certify that fact to the Director of
Lands, with a certified copy of the decree of confirmation or judgment of the court
and the plan and technical description of the land
● The final decree of the court shall be in every case the basis for the original certificate
of title in favor of the persons entitled to the property under the prescribed
procedure in PRD.

Land declared public land in previous registration case may be the subject of judicial
confirmation
● Zara v. Director of Lands, a parcel of land which had been declared public land in a
previous registration proceeds was again the subject of application by personal
claiming imperfect title on the basis of continuous and adverse possession for more

LTD | Sept 25 | 3

Definition of Terms
Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples
● a group of people or homogenous societies identified by self-ascription and ascription
by other, who have continuously lived as organized community on communally
bounded and defined territory, and who have, under claims of ownership since time
immemorial, occupied, possessed customs, tradition and other distinctive cultural
traits, or who have, through resistance to political, social and cultural inroads of
colonization, non-indigenous religions and culture, became historically differentiated
from the majority of Filipinos.
● include peoples who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the
populations which inhabited the country, at the time of conquest or colonization, or
at the time of inroads of non-indigenous religions and cultures, or the establishment
of present state boundaries, who retain some or all of their own social, economic,
cultural and political institutions, but who may have been displaced from their
traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains
Ancestral Domains
● Subject to Section 56 hereof, refer to all areas generally belonging to ICCs/IPs
comprising lands,inland waters, coastal areas, and natural resources therein, held
under a claim of ownership, occupied or possessed by ICCs/IPs, themselves or
through their ancestors, communally or individually since time immemorial,
continuously to the present except when interrupted by war, force majeure or
displacement by force, deceit, stealth or as a consequence of government projects or
any other voluntary dealings entered into by government and private individuals,
corporations, and which are necessary to ensure their economic, social and cultural
welfare.
● ancestral land, forests, pasture, residential, agricultural, and other lands individually
owned whether alienable and disposable or otherwise, hunting grounds, burial
grounds, worship areas, bodies of water, mineral and other natural resources, and
lands which may no longer be exclusively occupied by ICCs/IPs but from which their
traditionally had access to for their subsistence and traditional activities, particularly
the home ranges of ICCs/IPs who are still nomadic and/or shifting cultivators
Ancestral Lands
● Subject to Section 56 hereof, refers to land occupied, possessed and utilized by
individuals, families and clans who are members of the ICCs/IPs since time
immemorial, by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, under claims of
individual or traditional group ownership,continuously, to the present except when
interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a
consequence of government projects and other voluntary dealings entered into by
government and private individuals/corporations, including, but not limited to,
residential lots, rice terraces or paddies, private forests, swidden farms and tree lots
Indiginous concept of ownership
● IPRA recognizes the existence of the ICCs/IPs as a distinct sector of Philippine
society
● It grants the ownership and possession of their ancestral domains and ancestral
lands, and defines the extent of these lands and domains
● Customary law which traces its origin to native title
● Ancestral lands/domains are private lands belonging to ICCs/IPs who have actually
occupied, possessed and utilized their territories under claim of ownership since time
immemorial
IPRA connotes group or communal ownership
● The property held in common is meant to benefit the whole indigenous community
and not merely the individual member
● Ancestral domains are the ICCs/IPs ‘ private but community property
● Not part of public domain
● Communal rights are held in trust for all generations of the ICCs/IPs past, present
and future
● Domain cannot be transferred to other persons by any one person and belongs to the
ICCs/IPs as a community
Ownership over the natural resources belong to the State
● Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, G.R. No. 135385
● Justice Kapunan: the mere fact that Sec. 3(a) defines ancestral domain to include the
natural resources does not ipso facto convert the character of such natural resources
as private property of the IP
● Justice Puno: The IPs’ rights over the natural resources take the form of management
and stewardship
● The law only grants the IPs “priority rights” in the development or exploitation of
natural resources
Delineation and recognition of ancestral domains
● Self-delineation is the guiding principle in the identification & delineation of
ancestral domain
● The Sworn Statement of the Elders as to the Scope of the territories and
agreements/pacts made with neighboring ICCs/IPs, if any, will be essential to the
determination of these traditional territories. The Government shall take the
necessary steps to identify lands which the ICCs/IPs concerned traditionally occupy
and guarantee effective protection of their rights of ownership and possession
Registration of CADTs and CALTs
● The NCIP, thru ADO, shall register all CADTs and CALTs with the Register of Deeds
of the place where the properties are located
● Recording of CADT and CALT does not result in the issuance of a Torrens certificate
of title
● Purpose of registration: to appraise the public of the fact of recognition by the NCIP
of specific claims to portions of ancestral domains/lands
Modes of acquisition
● Native title over both ancestral land and domains; or
○ Native title - pre-conquest rights to lands and domains which, as far back
as memory reaches, have been held under a claim of ownership by ICC. It
presumes that land is private and was never public
○ Carino v. Insular Government is the only case that specifically and
categorically recognizes native title
● Torrens title under PLA or PRD with respect to ancestral land only
IPRA converts ancestral lands as public agricultural land for registration purposes
● For purposes of registration, IPRA expressly converts ancestral land into public
agricultural land which may be disposed of by the State
LTD | Sept 25 | 4
 ● Hence, there is no need to secure a separate certification that the ancestral land is
alienable and disposable in character, it being sufficient to show that the land is duly
certified as such
● Individually-owned ancestral lands, which are agricultural in character and actually
used for agricultural, residential, pasture, and tree farming purposes are considered
alienable and disposable under IPRA
● IPRA converts ancestral lands, regardless whether the land has a slope of 18% or
over, from private to public agricultural land for proper disposition
● The registration of ancestral lands is different from regular registration proceedings
in the sense that:
○ The applicant is a member of an indigenous cultural group
○ He must have been in possession of an individually-owned ancestral land
for not less than 30 years immediately preceding the approval of the Act
on Oct. 29, 1997
○ By operation of law (IPRA), the land is already classified as alienable and
disposable land, even if it has a slope of 18 or over, hence, there is no need
to submit a separate certification that the land has been classified as
alienable and disposable
Effect of registration
● A duly issued Torrens certificate of title covering ancestral lands has the same
efficacy, validity and indefeasibility as any title issued thru regular registration
proceedings
● Generally conclusive evidence of ownership
● Not subject to collateral attack
● Cannot be impugned, altered, changed, modified, enlarged or diminished except in a
direct proceeding permitted by law
● Subject to the rule of imprescriptibility
● Land shall not be subject to any burden except those note on the certificate
Transfer of land or property rights
● These lands may be transferred subject to the following limitations:
○ Only to members of the same ICCs/IPs
○ In accord with customary laws and traditions
○ Subject to the right of redemption of the ICCs/IPs for a period of 15 years
if the land was transferred to a non-member of the ICCs/IPS under the
terms of the law
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)
● An independent agency under the OP
● Composed of 7 Commissioners belonging to ICCs/IPs from different ethnographic
areas who are appointed by the President
● NCIP shall protect and promote the interest and well being of the ICCs/IPs with due
regard to their beliefs, customs, traditions, and institutions
● Formulation and implementation of policies, plans, programs to promote and protect
the rights and well-beings of the ICCs/IPs and the recognition of their ancestral
domains as well as their rights thereto
Specific powers and functions
Formulation of policies, issuance of rules and regulations
● NCIP has been granted administrative, quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers
● Formulation and implementation of policies, plans, programs, and projects for the
economic, social and cultural development of ICPs/IPs and to monitor the
implementation
● To promulgate the necessary rules and regulation for the implementation of the Act
Resolution of conflicts
● NCIP has limited jurisdiction over claims and disputes involving rights of IP/ICCs only
when they arise between or among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP group
● Proper regular courts shall have jurisdiction if such claims and disputes arise between
or among parties who do not belong the same ICC/IP group
● NCIP shall have primary jurisdiction over
○ Adverse claims and border dispute arising from delineation of ancestral
domains/lands, and
○ Cancellation of fraudulently-issued CADTs, regardless of whether the
parties are non-ICC/IPs, or members of different ICCs/IPs groups
○ Violations of ICCs/IPs rights under Sec. 72 where both parties belong to
the same ICCs/IPs group
● NCIP shall have the authority to decide all appeals from the decisions and acts of all
various offices within the Commission
○ It shall promulgate the necessary rules and regulations to carry out its
adjudicatory function
● Any decision, order, award, or ruling of the NCIP on any ancestral domain dispute or
any matter pertaining to the application, implementation, enforcement, and
interpretation of the Act may be brought by a Petition for Review to the CA within 15
days from receipt of a copy
Issuance of certificates of ancestral domain title (CADT) or certificates of ancestral land titles
(CALT)
● NCIP has the authority to issue CADT or CALT
● The application for issuance of a CALT pending before the NCIP is akin to a
registration proceeding
○ Seeks and official recognition of one’s claim to a particular land
○ In rem
○ Officially establishing one’s land as ancestral land
○ Titling of ancestral land does not vest ownership but only recognizes
ownership that has already vested in the applicant by virtue of his and his
predecessor-in-interest possession of the property since time immemorial
Cancellation of ancestral domain and ancestral lind titles
● NCIP has exclusive and original jurisdiction over petitions for cancelation of
CADT/CALT alleged to have been fraudulently acquired and issued to any person or
community as provided for under Sec. 54, provided that such action is filed within 1
year from the date of registration
● Courts of justice have jurisdiction over actions or incidents affecting a certificate of
title issued thru registration proceedings
6. Cases
Fortuna v. Republic, GR No. 173423, March 5, 2014
Registration under RA No. 8371 (Indigenous Peoples Rights Act – IPRA)
1. Indigenous Cultural Communities - ownership and possession of their ancestral domains
LTD | Sept 25 | 5
 and ancestral lands
a. Ancestral domains
b. Ancestral lands
2. Modes of Acquisition
a. By native title over both ancestral lands and domains; or
b. By confirmation of title under the Public Land Act (CA No. 141, as amended)
or the Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529) [ancestral lands only]
3. Requisites for registration
4. Case
Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, GR No. 135385, Dec. 6, 2000
Notes:
The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
● October 29, 1997 RA 8371 IPRA was enacted
● It is a law dealing with a specific group of people
○ ICCs- Indigenous Cultural Communities
○ IPs - Indigenous People
● ICC is used in the 1987 consti while IP is a contemporary international language in
ILO (International Labor Organization) convention 169 and UN Draft Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
● The law allows IPs to obtain recognition of their right to ownership over ancestral
lands and domains by virtue of native title
● Ancestral lands remains even if the possession is interrupted by voluntary dealings
Constitutional provisions:
● Art. II SECTION 22. The State recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural
communities within the framework of national unity and development.
● Art. XII SECTION 5. The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and national
development policies and programs, shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural
communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social, and cultural well-
being.
The Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws governing property rights
or relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain.
● Art. XIII SECTION 13. The State shall establish a special agency for disabled persons for
rehabilitation, self-development and self-reliance, and their integration into the
mainstream of society.
● Art. XIV SECTION 17. The State shall recognize, respect, and protect the rights of
indigenous cultural communities to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and
institutions. It shall consider these rights in the formulation of national plans and policies.
● These constitutional provisions are cornerstones of IPRA which was enacted to
recognize and promote all the rights of ICCs in the country
Constitutionality of IPRA
● Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources
○ petitioners assailed the constitutionality of IPRA and IRRs on the ground
that they amount to unlawful deprivation of the State’s ownership over
land of public domain and natural resources, in violation of the Regalian
Doctrine in Sec. 2 Art. XII
○ Petitioners contented that the all-encompassing definition of “ancestral
domains/lands: which might even include private lands found within the
areas, violating the rights of private landowners.
○ Petitioners also contends that the powers of NCIP (National Commission
of Indigenous Peoples) and making customary law applicable in
settlements violates due process.
○ Based on Rule VII, Part II Sec. 1 of NCIP Admin Order 1 series of 1998
which provides that the administrative relationship of NICP to the OP is
characterized as lateral but autonomous for purposes of policy and
program coordination which allegedly infringes on the power of control of
the President over executive departments (Art. VII Sec 17 Consti)
○ The votes of the justices were equally divided (7 to 7) and necessary
majority was not obtained despite the deliberation. Accordingly, Rule 56
ROC, the petition was dismissed, IPRA was upheld as valid.
○ According to the separate opinion of Justice Puno, IPRA is a novel piece of
legislation.
■ It grants ICCs/IPs a distinct kind of ownership over ancestral
domains/ lands
■ Land titles do not exist in the IP’s economic and social system
because the concept of individual ownership is alien to them.
■ IPRA declares ancestral lands and domains held by native title as
never having been a public land and presumed to be private.
■ Concept of native title in IPRA was taken from Carino v. Insular
Government which firmly established the concept of native title
that existed irrespective of any loyal grant from the State
○ In Carino v. Insular Government, Carino applied for registration of ancestral
land in BEnguet. He established that he and his ancestors had lived on the
land, cultivated it and land was passed on by inheritance according to
native customs.
■ The government opposed the application invoking the theory of
Jura Regalia.
■ Court laid down the presumed of a certain title held: Land held
by this title is presumed to never have been public:
1. As far back as testimony or memory went
2. Under a claim of private ownership
○ Justice Puno stressed that the ancestral lands are not part of public
domain. They are private ownership of IPs/ICCs even though they are not
mentioned in Art. XII sec. 5 consti.
○ Spirit of IPRA lies on the distinct concept of ancestral domain. Also, the
land is vital in terms of survival of IPs/ICCs.
○ The land is not acquired from the State. The ownership is by virtue of a
native title presupposed that the land has been held by its possessor and
predecessor-in-interest in the concept of an owner since time immemorial.
○ Consequently, the classification of lands of public domain into agricultural,
forest or timber, mineral and national parks under the constitution is
irrelevant because the Regalian Doctrine which vests in the State
ownership of the lands of public domain does not cover ancestral
lands/domains.
FORMS AND CONTENTS, DEALINGS WITH LAND
1. Form and contents (Sec. 15)
Sec. 15 . Form and contents - The application for land registration shall be in writing, signed by the
LTD | Sept 25 | 6
applicant or the person duly authorized in his behalf, and sworn to before any officer authorized to
administer oaths for the province or city where the application was actually signed. If there is more 9. That (Note: If the land included in the application is bounded by a public or private way or road,
than one applicant, the application shall be signed and sworn to by and on behalf of each. The there should be stated in this paragraph whether or not the applicant claims any and what land within
application shall contain a description of the and and shall state the citizenship and civil status of the the limits of the way or road and whether the applicant desires to have the line of the way or road
applicant, whether single or married, and, if married, the name of the wife or husband, and, if the determined.) ________________________________________ ___________________________
marriage has been legally dissolved, when and how the marriage relations terminated. It shall also
state the full names and addresses of all occupants of the land and those of the adjoining owners, if 10. That the following documents are attached hereto and made a part hereof:
known, and, if not known, it shall state the extent of the search made to find them. ___________________________________ ________________________________
Signed at ___________________ this _____________________ day of ____________________, in the year nineteen
The application, shall, in form, be substantially as follows: hundred and ______________________.
Republic of the Philippines
Court of First Instance of _________________ __________________________
Applicant
The undersigned, ____________________________________________________________hereby applies (or apply) to
have the land hereinafter described brought under the operation of the Property Registration Decree,
and to have the title thereto registered and confirmed: _________________________
AND DECLARE . . . . . (Post Office Address)
1. That the applicants/s is/are the owners of the land (by virtue of inheritance or deed of sale or
conveyance and/or possession in accordance with Section 14 of said Decree), together with the REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
building and improvements thereon, with the exception of the PROVINCE (OR CITY) OF _______________
following:__________________________________________________________________ which is/are the property of
_________________________ residing at _________________________ The said land, consisting of ____________________ On this _______________ day of _________________________,19 ________ personally appeared before me the
parcel/s is/are situated, bounded and described as shown on the plan and technical descriptions above- named __________________________________________________ known to me to be the person/s who
attached hereto and made a part hereof, with the following executed the foregoing application and made oath that the statements therein are true of his/their
exception:___________________________________________________________________ knowledge, information and belief.
The Residence Certificate/s ______________________ of the applicant/s ______________ was/were exhibited to
2. That said land at the last assessment for taxation was assessed at P ____, Philippine currency, and me being No. _________________ issued at ___________________ dated ____________, 19 __________.
the buildings and other improvements at P ___________, Philippine currency.
________________________
3. That to the best of my/our knowledge and belief, there is no mortgage or encumbrance of any kind (Notary Public, or other Officer
whatsoever affecting said land, nor any other person having any interest therein, legal or equitable, or authorized to administer oaths)
in possession, other than as follows: PTR NO. _________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Notes:
4. That the applicant/s has/have acquired said land in the following manner: A. Requisite steps in bringing the land under the Torrens System:
________________________________ a. Survey of land m=by the Land Management Bureau or a duly licensed
private surveyor;
(Note: Refer to Sec. 14 of said Decree. State also whether the property is conjugal, paraphernal or b. Filing of application for registration by the applicant;
exclusive property of the applicant/s) c. Setting of the date for the initial hearing of the application by the court
d. Transmittal of the application and the date of initial hearing together with
5. That said land is occupied by the following person: _____________________________ all the documents or other pieces of evidence attached thereto by the
______________________________________________ Clerk of Court of the LRA;
e. Publication of the notice of the filing of the application and date and place
6. That the names in full and addresses, as far as known to the undersigned, of the owners of all of the hearing in the OG and in a newspaper of general circulation;
adjoining properties, of the persons mentioned in paragraphs 3 and 5, and of the persons shown on the f. Service by mailing of notice upon contiguous owners, occupants, and those
plan as claimants, are as follows: known to have interests in the property;
________________________________________________________________________________________ g. Posting by the sheriff of the notice in a conspicuous place on the land and
7. That the applicant/s is/are single or married to ____________________ (Note: if marriage has been legally in the bulletin board of the municipal building or city where the land is
dissolved, state when and how the marriage relation situated;
terminated.)_________________________________________________________________ _____________________ h. Filing of answer to the application by any person whether named in the
notice or not;
8. That the applicant's/s' full name, age, citizenship, residence, and postal address/es is/are as follows: i. Hearing of the case by the court;
___________________________________________________________________ j. Promulgation of judgment;

LTD | Sept 25 | 7

k. Issuance of an order for the issuance of a decree declaring the decision
final and instructing the LRA to issue the decree of confirmation and
registration;
l. Entry of the decree of registration with the LRA;
m. Sending the copy of the decree of registration to the corresponding
register of deeds; and
n. Transcription of the decree of registration in the registration book and the
issuance of the owner’s duplicate original certificate of title to the
applicant by the Register of Deeds upon payment of the prescribed fees
** failure to comply with these requirements will justify the court in denying the application
for registration
B. Form and contents of the application for registration
a. Full description of the land as evidenced by a survey plan dulu approved by
the Director of Lands, surveyor’s certificate, and technical description;
b. Citizenship and civil status of the applicant, whether single or married,
and , if married, the name of the spouse, and, if the marriage has been
legally dissolved, when and how the marriage terminated;
c. Full name and addresses of all occupants of the land and those of the
adjoining owners, if known, and, if not known, it shall state the extent of
the search made to find them;
d. Assessed value of the land and the buildings and improvements thereon;
e. Whether or not there are mortgages or encumbrances of any kind
whatsoever affecting the land, or any other person having any interest
therein, legal or equitable, or in possession thereof;
f. The manner by which the applicant has acquired the land;
g. Whether or not the property is conjugal, paraphernal, or exclusive
property of the applicant;
h. Names of all occupants of the land, if any;
i. Original muniments of title and other related documents supporting
applicant’s claim of ownership; and
j. If the land is bounded by a public or private way or road, whether or not
the applicant claims any and what portion of the land within the limits of
the way or road, and whether the applicant desires to have the line of the
way or road determined.
Sec. 16. Non-resident applicant - If the applicant is not a resident of the Philippines, he shall file with
his application an instrument in due form appointing an agent or representative residing in the
Philippines, giving his full name and postal address, and shall therein agree that the service of any legal
process in the proceedings under or growing out of the application made upon his agent or
representative shall be of the same legal effect as if made upon the applicant within the Philippines. If
the agent or representative dies or leaves the Philippines, the applicant shall forthwith make another
appointment for the substitute, and, if he fails to do so, the court may dismiss the application.
Notes:
● A SPA executed before a notary public or other competent official in a foreign
country cannot be admitted in evidence unless it is duly certified in accordance with
the rules on Evidence.
● Non-resident applicants may be represented by an Attorney-in-Fact
2. What and where to file (Sec. 17)
Sec. 17. What and where to file - The application for land registration shall be filed with the RTC of the
province or city where the land is situated. The applicant shall file together with the application all
original muniments of titles or copies thereof and a survey plan of the land approved by the Lands
Management Bureau. The Clerk of Court shall not accept any application unless it is shown that the
applicant has furnished the Director of Lands with a copy of the application and all annexes.
Notes:
● RTCs have the authority to act not only on applications for original registration (Sec.
2) but also on all petitions filed after the original registration of title. Coupled with
this authority is the power to hear and determine all questions arising upon such
applications or petitions. Especially where the issue of ownership is tied up with the
question of registration, the land registration court has primary and plenary
jurisdiction.
● However, first level courts may also be assigned to handle original registration cases
in the following instances:
○ Where the lot is not the subject of controversy or opposition; or
○ Where the lot is contested by the value thereof does not exceed Php
100,000
● A survey plan provides reference to the property’s exact identity and location. The
submission of such is mandatory. However, this rule can be relaxed when there are
other pieces of evidence which may likewise substantially prove the limits and extent
of the property sought to be registered (blueprints, technical description of the
property, etc.)
● Court having territorial jurisdiction over the land should take cognizance of the case
● Constructive seizure of the land for registration is effected through publication of the
application for registration and service of notice to affected parties
● The application for registration must be accompanied by a survey plan of the land
duly approved by the Director of Lands, together with the claimant’s muniments of
title to prove ownership
● The Land Registration Authority has no authority to approve original survey plans
nor to check the correctness thereof (PD No. 239)
○ The Lands Management Bureau may now verify and approve survey plans
for original registration purposes.
● The application must be accompanied with a proof showing the applicant provided
the Director of Lands with a copy of the application and all annexes
○ Why? To show respect to Jure Regalia and the authority of the Director of
Lands
3. Amendments (Sec. 19)
Sec. 19. Amendments. — Amendments to the application including joinder, substitution, or
discontinuance as to parties may be allowed by the court at any stage of the proceedings upon just and
reasonable terms.
Amendments which shall consist in a substantial change in the boundaries or an increase in area of the
land applied for or which involve the inclusion of an additional land shall be subject to the same
requirements of publication and notice as in an original
application.
LTD | Sept 25 | 8
Notes:
● A single application may be filed for two or more parcels of land, provided that:
○ They belong to the same applicant
○ They are situated in the same province or city
● Amendments and alterations are allowed in the description of the land (even after its
publication and registration decree) as long as the amendments are advertised and
published.
● If the amendment is a reduction of the original area, no new publication is required

4. Dealings with land pending original registration (Sec. 22)

Sec. 22. Dealings with land pending original registration. — After the filing of the application and
before the issuance of the decree of registration, the land therein described may still be the subject of
dealings in whole or in part, in which case the interested party shall present to the court the pertinent
instruments together with a subdivision plan approved by the Director of Lands in case of transfer of
portions thereof, and the court, after notice to the parties, shall order such land registered subject to
the conveyance or encumbrance created by said instruments, or order that the decree of registration
be issued in the name of the person to whom the property has been conveyed by said instruments.

Notes:
● The land may be sold or encumbered even after the application was filed (but before
the issuance of decree)
○ the interested party should submit to the court the pertinent instruments
evidencing the transaction to be considered in the final adjudication of the
case.
● In case of transfer of a portion of the land, the corresponding subdivision plan,
approved by the Director of Lands, should also be presented.
● When will resolutions on land resolutions or cadastral proceedings take effect?
○ Only after 1 year from the entry of the final decree by LRA
● A motion to lift the order of general default and motion under Section 22 may not be
filed after the finality of the judgment in the registration case.

5. Cases
Mendoza v. Court of Appeals, GR No. L-36637, July 14, 1978
Benin v. Tuason, GR No. L-26127, June 28, 1974

LTD | Sept 25 | 9