Vallarta vs Iac

VALLARTA VS IAC

FACTS: •

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

The Petitioner Vallarta Vallarta in this case has possession over a fishpond which consists of 4 parcels of land and an area of 57 hectares in the Municipality of Macabebe, Pampanga. uch property was inalienable part of public domain having been classified as mangrove swap. !n "uly ##, $%&$ the Minister of 'atural (esources declared such property in )uestion as alienable and disposable for fishpond development. Vallarta was the one who recipitated the release from the public domain of the are as alienable and disposable for fishpond development by filing an application. Vallarta on his proposal developed the sub*ect area with his co+plaintiffs in $%7 and improved and developed the fishpond. Presently Vallarta was able to develop 5- hectares of said land. The omposite /and lassification Team Team declared the land as alienable and disposable for fishpond purposes and later testified that upon an ocular inspection, they found Petitioner Vallarta occupying the sub*ect area and saw wor0ers and plaintiffs in the fishpond. !n My ##, $%&$ Vallarta filed an application for 1ishpond /ease 2greement with the 3ureau of 1isheries and 2)uatic (esources covering the 57 hectare land. Vallarta and his co+plaintiffs had since $%7 continuously and peacefully developed and operated sub*ect fishpond until disturbance occurred on May to "une $%&$ and complete interruption forcible entry on "une ##, $%&$. The defendant Marcos contended that the 57 hectare fishpond forms part of a $-# hectare property. 47 hectares already titled to respondent 2rroyo under a TT from the !T dated 2ugust #$, $%$7. 6vidence of 2rroyos title and ownership of the $-# hectare developed fishpond aside from the certificate of title was evidenced by ta8 declarations, official receipts of real estate ta8 payments and contracts of lease

ISSUE:

9!' 2rroyo is the rightful owner of the fishpond in )uestion HELD:

'o. :t is elementary in the law governing natural resources that forest land cannot be owned by private persons. :t is not registrable. The adverse possession which can be the basis of a grant of title in confirmation of imperfect title cases cannot commence until after forest land has been declared alienable and disposable. possession of forest land, no matter how long cannot convert it into private property. :f somehow forest land happens to have been included in a Torrens Title, the title is null and void  insofar  insofar as that forest land is concerned. Vallartas do not claim to own the disputed fishponds. They admit that when they entered on the land, improved and developed it, and planted fish therein, it was still forest land. This e8plains why they filed applications with the proper authorities for permits or licenses to develop fishponds in the area.