Republic of the Philippines

FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 1, ALAMINOS

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Civil Case No. 123

Petitioner,

vs. for

SERGIO DEL MUNDO RECOVERY OF

POSSESSION
Respondent. AND OWNERSHIP

x --------------------------------------x

MEMORANDUM
For the Respondent

COMES NOW THE Respondent, through the undersigned counsel,

unto this Honorable Court most respectfully submits and presents this
Memorandum in the above-titled case and aver that:

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Respondent received one hectare of land from his parents as gift for
his marriage. This land is very fertile as it is bounded on the south by the
Pag-ibig River. For ten years, respondent and his wife and their three
children got their daily subsistence from cultivating the land but their harvests
are still not enough to give their children the little luxuries of life.
 Fate must have been against them. Pag-ibig River changed its natural
course. The river traversed the center of their land engulfing 3,500 square
meters or 1/3 of their land. Thus, he cannot plant on the whole stretch of the
land. Moreso, it became more difficult for him to tend his land since he must
cross the river first before he can reach the other portion of his farm.

Respondent contemplated on mortgaging his land to Alaminos Rural

Bank, Inc. While browsing over the OCT of the land and other supporting
documents, he chanced upon a map. It shows a purported chest of gold in
his land situated in the middle of his land which is now being occupied by
Pag-ibig River. Without the authority from the government, he formulated a
plan on how to excavate the land under the river and he successfully
discovered the chest of gold.

The fortune changed their life. The news of his discovery eventually
reached the Government. The Government is now claiming that the
Respondent is not entitled to the treasure he found as he was a trespasser.
The Government argued that the Pag-ibig River belongs to the Republic as
all big bodies of water are.

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

1.Whether the river located in the land of the respondent is owned by

the state.

2. Whether the chest of gold belongs to the government of the

Philippines.
 3. Whether Sergio is entitled to the treasure he found as the latter

claims that he was a trespasser.

ARGUMENTS

1. The Government grossly erred in applying Article 457 of the Civil

Code to respondents’ benefit
2. Hidden  treasure  belongs  to  the  owner  of  the  land, building, or
other property on which it is found.
 
Nevertheless,  when  the  discovery  is  made  on  the  property  of
another, or of the State or any of its subdivisions, and by chance, one-
half  thereof  shall  be  allowed  to  the  finder.  If  the  finder  is  a
trespasser, he shall not be entitled to any share of the treasure.
 
3. If the finder is the owner of the land, building, or other property
where it is found, the entire hidden treasure belongs to him.

DISCUSSION

1. It is important to emphasize that the respondent is the bonafide owner of

the parcel of land. In the Philippines, the presentation of a valid certificate of
title of the real property is a conclusive evidence of ownership of the person
whose name the certificate of title is entitled to. Under Section 47 of the Land
Registration Act, or Act No. 496, it provides that “the original certificates in
the registration book, any copy thereof duly certified under the signature of
the clerk, or of the register of deeds of the province or city where the land is
situated, and the seal of the court, and also the owner’s duplicate certificate,
shall be received as evidence in all the courts of the Philippine Islands and
shall be conclusive as to all matters contained therein except so far as
otherwise provided in this Act.”

ARTICLE 437. The owner of a parcel of land is the owner of its surface and of everything
under it, and he can construct thereon any works or make any plantations and
excavations which he may deem proper, without detriment to servitudes and subject to
special laws and ordinances.

2. This principle is embodied in several rules pertaining to land rights. For

instance, Article 438 of the Civil Code determines that hidden treasure
underground belongs to the owner of the land, building, or property.

3. Respondent is the owner of the land where the treasure was found. An he
is entitled in the said treasure. Even it is found under the water. The said land
was still under his possession.

CONCLUSION

With the laws and jurisprudence presented, the respondent, through his
counsel believes that Plaintiff Respondent is the owner of the said treasure
he found on the parcel of land that he owns.

PRAYER
Wherefore it is prayed, in light of the issues raised, arguments

advanced, and authorities citied, that this Honourable Court may be pleased

to :
 1. To declare that the said parcel of land which was encumbered by the

river was under the name of the respondent.

2. To recover the possession of the treasure he found.

3. That the treasure he found was In his property and the government has

no right to claim the treasure.

Some other relief and remedies as may be deemed just and equitable
under the premises are likewise prayed for.

Alaminos City, 26th day December of , 2021.

MAGSINO LAW OFFICE

Counsel of the Respondent
Avant Garde, Sto Tomas,
Batangas

By:

ATTY. NONIEBELL MAGSINO

Roll No. 11111
IBP O.R. No. 123456
Batangas Chapter
PTR No. 1457908E

Copy Furnished:

Counsel of the Defendant

4th Floor, Bigbang Building,
Batangas City