10. CASE TITLE: Abejaron v. Nabasa, GR No.

84831, June 20, 2021

Doctrine:
The doctrine used in this case is the doctrine of Sec. 48(b) of the Public Land
Act, as amended by Republic Act No. 1942. This doctrine states that citizens of
the Philippines who occupy lands of the public domain or claim to own such
lands, but whose titles have not been perfected or completed, may apply for
confirmation of their claims and the issuance of a certificate of title through the
Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial Courts). This doctrine was applied
in the case to determine whether the petitioner had acquired title over the
disputed land through open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession
and occupation for at least 30 years.

FACTS:

Pacencio Abejaron and Felix Nabasa were involved in a legal dispute over a
118-square meter portion of Lot 1, Block 5, Psu-154953 in Silway, General
Santos City. Abejaron claimed that he had been living on and improving the
land since 1945, while Nabasa claimed to have been residing on a separate
180-square meter public land since the same year.

Despite Abejaron's possession and improvement of the land, Nabasa

successfully applied for and received a free patent over the entire Lot 1,
including the disputed 118-square meter portion.

Abejaron filed an administrative protest, but due to absenteeism, it was

dismissed. In 1982, Abejaron took legal action against Nabasa, filing an action
for reconveyance with damages seeking to regain his 118-square meter portion
of the land.

After trial, the court ruled in favor of Abejaron, declaring his possession and
occupancy of the land in good faith and deeming Nabasa's claim over the
disputed portion a mistake.

However, the Court of Appeals denied Abejaron's motion for reconsideration,

stating that there was no proof of actual fraud or irregularity in the issuance of
the title to Nabasa. They also noted that Abejaron had not adduced any
evidence of title to the disputed land and therefore could not maintain an
action for reconveyance.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioner has acquired title over a disputed land.
RULING:
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, Pacencio Abejaron. The
court declared his possession and occupancy of the disputed 118-square meter
portion of Lot 1, Block 5, Psu-154953 in Silway, General Santos City as in good
faith. The court also deemed the claim of Felix Nabasa, the respondent, over
the same portion of land as a mistake.

The Supreme Court explained that the disputed land falls under the
classification of public domain, meaning that it belongs to the state. However,
there is an exception to this rule. If the land has been in the possession of an
occupant and their predecessors-in-interest since time immemorial, it can be
presumed that the land was never part of the public domain and may be
considered private property even before the Spanish conquest. This possession
and occupation of the land for a specific duration can be considered as an
equivalent to an express grant from the state.

Under the law, the possessor shall be conclusively presumed to have performed
all the necessary conditions for a government grant and is entitled to a
certificate of title. Therefore, confirming the possession and granting title
through registration is merely a formality to recognize a title that is already
vested. However, in order to acquire title to the land, the possession must be
open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious for the required period of time. In
the specific case of Pacencio Abejaron and Felix Nabasa, Abejaron failed to
provide well-nigh incontrovertible evidence to prove his possession and
occupation of the disputed land for the required period, thereby preventing him
from maintaining an action for reconveyance.