Agne vs. Director of Lands 181 SCRA 46 Page 22

G.R. No. L-40399 February 6, 1990 MARC MARCEL ELIINO C. AGNE, GNE, FELI FELIX X ORIA ORIANE NE,, AGATO GATON N TAGA TAGANA NAS, S, HILA HILARI RIO O ESCO ESCORPI RPIZO ZO,, ISA ISABELO BELO MAURI MAURICI CIO, O, HEIR HEIRS S OF ROMA ROMAN N DAMA DAMASO, SO, NAMEL NAMELY: Y: JORGE DAMASO DAMASO and ALEJANDRO DAMASO, DAMASO, HEIRS OF FRANCISCO FRANCISCO RAMOS, NAMELY NAMELY:: ENCA ENCARNACIO RNACION N R. LEANO LEANO and DOMING DOMINGA A R. MEDRA MEDRANO, NO, HEIRS HEIRS OF SABINA SABINA GELAC GELACIO IO AGAPITO GAPITO,, NAMELY NAMELY:: SERAPIO SERAPIO AGAPITO, GAPITO, and NICOLA NICOLASA SA AGAPITO, FELISA DICCION AGNE, ESTANISLAO GOROSPE, LIBRADO BADUA, NICOLAS NICOLAS VILLANUEVA, VILLANUEVA, HEIRS OF CARLOS CARLOS PALADO, PALADO, NAMELY: NAMELY: FORTUNATA FORTUNATA PALADO PALADO and ISABELITA ISABELITA PALADO, PRIMITIVO PRIMITIVO TAGANAS, TAGANAS, PANFILO PANFILO SOINGCO, SOINGCO, BERNA BERNARDO RDO PALAT PALATTAO TAO,, MARCEL MARCELINO INO S. SANTO SANTOS S and PAULIN PAULINO O D. AGNE AGNE JR. (Mi (Minor) nor),, rep represe resent nted ed by his his moth mother er FELI FELISA SA DICC DICCIION AGNE, GNE, petitioners, vs. THE THE DIRE DIRECT CTOR OR OF LANDS LANDS,, PRES PRESEN ENTA TACIO CION N AGPOON GPOON GASCO GASCON, N, JOA JOAQUIN QUIN GASCON GASCON and HON. HON. ROSALIO ROSALIO C. SEGUND SEGUNDO, O, Presid Presiding ing Judge, Judge, Court of First First Instance of Pangasinan, Branch V, respondents. G.R. No. L-72255 February 6,1990 MARC MARCEL ELIN INO O C. AGNE, GNE, FELI FELIX X ORIA ORIANE NE,, AGATO GATON N TAGA TAGANA NAS S (dec (decea ease sed) d),, represen represented ted by FLOREN FLORENTIN TINO O C. TAGA TAGANAS NAS,, FELISA FELISA DICCIO DICCION N AGNE, AGNE, HILARIO HILARIO ESCO ESCORPI RPIZO ZO,, NICO NICOLA LAS S VILL VILLA ANUEVA NUEVA,, ISA ISABELO BELO MAURI MAURICI CIO, O, ESTA ESTANI NISLA SLAO O GOROSPE (deceased), represented by ELIZABETH G. BADUA and SILVINA G. VALERIO, VALERIO, LIBRADO LIBRADO BADUA, BADUA, JOSE ALSISTO, ALSISTO, SERAPIO AGAPITO, AGAPITO, NICOLASA NICOLASA AGAPITO, AGAPITO, JORGE DAMASO, ALEJANDRO ALEJANDRO DAMASO, DAMASO, ENCARNACIO ENCARNACION N RAMOS, RAMOS, DOMINGA RAMOS and CARLOS PALADO, petitioners, vs. HON. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, PRESENTACION AGPOON GASCON and JOAQUIN GASCON, respondents.

On April 13, 1971, private respondent spouses filed Civil Case No. U-2286 in the Court of First First Insta Instance nce of Pang Pangas asina inan n for for recov recovery ery of posse possess ssion ion and and damag damages es again against st petiti petition oners ers.. Their Their compl complain aintt state states s that that they they are are the the regis register tered ed owne owners rs under under the aforesaid Transfer Certificate of Title No. 32209 of the parcel of land situated in Barrio Bantog, Asingan, Pangasinan which is now in the possession of petitioners. Petitioners answered that the land which was formerly a part of the river is owned by them by reason of accretion and accession due to the big flood that happened in 1920. They contend that since 1920, they and their predecessors in interest occupied and exercised dominion openly and adversely over said portion of the abandoned river bed in question abutting their respective riparian lands continuously continuously up to the present to the exclusion of all other persons, particularly Herminigildo Agpoon and that they have introduced improvements thereon by constructing irrigation canals and planting trees and agricultural crops thereon 6 and converted the land into a productive area. During the pendency of the said case, the petitioners filed a complaint (Case No. U2649 ) against the Director of Lands and Spouses Agpoon with the CFI of Pangasinan for annulment of title, reconveyance of and/or action to clear title to a parcel of land. They allege that the land in question belong to them. They further contend that it was only on April 13, 1971, when respondent spouses filed a complaint against them, that they they found found out that that the said land land was was grante granted d by the the Gove Govern rnmen mentt to Hermi Hermini nigil gildo do  Agpoon under under Free Patent Patent No. 23263, pursuant pursuant to which Original Original Certificate Certificate of Title No. 2370 was issued in the latter's name and that the said patent and subsequent titles issued pursuant thereto are null and void since the said land, an abandoned river bed, is of private ownership and, therefore, cannot be the subject of a public land grant.

On June 21, 1974, the trial court rendered a decision in Civil Case U-2286 in favor of  the Respondents. On June 24, 1974, Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, acting on the motion to dismiss filed by respondents Director of Lands and spouses Agpoon, issued an order  dismissing Civil Case No. U-2649 for annulment of title by merely citing the statement in the case of  Antonio,  Antonio, et al. vs. Barroga, et al. 12 that an action to annul a free patent many years after it had become final and indefeasible states no cause of action. ISSUE: Whether the action to annul a free patent many years after it had become final and indefeasible states no cause of action. Ruling: No The facts alleged in the complaint, which are deemed hypothetically admitted upon the filing of the motion to dismiss, constitute a sufficient cause of action against private respondents. In the case at bar, it was admitted in the stipulation of facts that the land was formerly an abandoned river bed formed due to natural causes in 1920. It was likewise admitted that the riparian owners of the lands abutting said abandoned river  bed were the plaintiffs and/or their predecessors in interest and that since then and up to the present, they have been occupying and cultivating aliquot portions of the said land proportionate to the respective lengths of their riparian lands and that they are the real and lawful owners of the said land as decreed by Article 370 of the old Civil Code, the law then in force that time. With that being said, then, the land in question was and is of private ownership and, therefore, beyond the jurisdiction of the Director of Lands. The free patent and subsequent title issued pursuant thereto are null and void. The indefeasibility and imprescriptibility of a Torrens title issued pursuant to a patent may be invoked only when the land involved originally formed part of the public domain. If it was a private land, the patent and certificate of title issued upon the patent are a nullity. The rule on the incontrovertibility of a certificate of title upon the expiration of one year, after the entry of the decree, pursuant to the provisions of the Land Registration Act, does not apply where an action for the cancellation of a patent and a certificate of title issued pursuant thereto is instituted on the ground that they are null and void because the Bureau of Lands had no jurisdiction to issue them at all, the land in question having having been withdrawn from the public domain prior to the subsequent award of the patent and the grant of a certificate of title to another person. Such an action is different from a review of the decree of title on the ground of fraud.  Although a period period of one year has already already expired expired from the time a certificate certificate of title was issued pursuant to a public grant, said title does not become incontrovertible but is null and void if the property covered thereby is originally of private ownership, and an action to annu annull the same same does does not not presc prescrib ribe. e. Moreov Moreover, er, since since herein herein petit petitio ioner ners s are are in 20 possession of the land in dispute, an action to quiet title is imprescriptible. Their action for reconveyance which, in effect, seeks to quiet title to property in one's possession is impres imprescr cript iptibl ible. e. Their Their undis undistur turbed bed poss possess essio ion n for a numbe numberr of years years gave gave them them a continuing right to seek the aid of a court of equity to determine the nature of the adverse claims of a third party and the effect on her title.