MATEO CARIO

vs.
THE INSULAR GOVERNMENT
G.R. No. 2869 March 25, 1907
By Richard Troy A. Colmenares
USA College of Law
Start: 7/4/14 10:53:51 AM
Finish: 7/4/14 1:01:31 PM
Nature of the Case
An appeal to assail the decision of the Court of Land Registration sustaining contention of the Insular Government that property in question is public property
and not that possessed by petitioner since time immemorial.

Facts
Cario sought before the Court of Land Registration (CLR) issuance of title for a parcel of land [some 40 ha in total land area]. The said land is bounded by
other property owners as follows: North by Sepa Cario, H. Phelps Whitmarsh, and Calsi; East by Kuidno, Esteban Gonzales, and of the Civil Government;
West: Sisco Cario and Mayengmeng; and South by Talaca. Said land is where petitioner resides for which he built his house. By order of the court, this
petition [No. 561] was joined with another petition [No. 834] which claimed a small parcel of land set out in the former petition. The Insular Government alleged
that the whole parcel of land is public property of the Government and that the same was not acquired in any manner or through any title of egression by the
State. After hearing the documentary and oral proofs, the court denied both petitions, the properties in question being public lands. The CLR deduced that
said land: (1) in 1884 Cario erected a house in the North to a property belonging Donaldson Sim; (2) that Cario sold said house to Cristobal Ramos who in
turn sold it to Donald Sim, moving to and living to a property belonging to Whitmarsh and for which the grandparents [Ortega and Minse] of his wife had lived;
(3) that Cario abandoned said Whitmarsh property and built a house in 1898 at the middle of said property now claimed by him.

Issue(s)
(1). Is Cario entitled to the property now claimed by him?

Held
(1). No.

The Possessory Information is against the Claim
Said possessory information [dated 7 March 1901 and registered on 11 March 1901] limits the property to 28 ha [against some 40 ha claimed by
Cario]. In said information, a plan has been established so that a road is to cut the land in half (from North to South) which did not include the west
side of the road in which the house of Cario is situated.

Land where Cario resides is classified as used for pasture and sowing
The possessory information classifies the land where Cario resides as used for pasture and sowing a classification of public lands.

Presumption is in favor of the State
A parcel of land, by express provisions of law, being of common origin, belongs to the State during its sovereignty and could only be
acquired by private persons if the same is passed by the State. Here, there is no proof of title of egression from the Spanish government
nor is there any equivalent title by composicion in favor of Cario.

The Possessory Information is not a title, but subject to verification for a certain period of time
The latest law on common land is the Royal Decree of 13 February 1894. Petitioner presents two witnesses in view of his contentions.
However, these are irrelevant. The provisions of said Decree also run counter to Carios claims because:

The subject land does not fall in the conditions provided by said decree, to wit:
1) that the land has been in an uninterrupted state of cultivation during a period of six years last past;
2) that the same has been possessed without interruption during a period of twelve years and has been in a state of
cultivation up to the date of the information and during the three years immediately preceding such information;
3) that such land had been possessed openly without interruption during a period of thirty or more years,
notwithstanding the land had not been cultivated.

Verification of Possessory Information is limited to one year
Possessory informations may be verified to protect the rights of the cultivators and persons in possession thereof. This,
however, is only limited to a period of one year, after which, said information lapses, the land being now reverted back to the
State or the community and by then, acquisition could only be had either in accordance with his right of possession under
common law or his average right in the event the Government or the State sold within a period of five years immediately
following the cancellation [expiration].

Purchase denounced by Felipe Zafra
As such, the only right belonging to Cario is that in accordance with the common law, which therefore remands the case back
to CLR.

The right of possession under common law is subordinate to the Spanish Administrative Law
This right only applies when subject land pertains to transferable or alienable lands, which condition and the determination thereof is
reversed to the government, which classified and designated the royal alienable lands for the purpose of distinguishing them from those
lands strictly public, and from forestry lands which could at no time pass to private ownership nor be acquired through time even after the
said royal decree of February 13, 1894.

Petitioners claim is now under a new law
Under the new law [act of Congress 1 July 1902] said royal or common lands have been classified merely as public lands, the alienation
of which was reserved to the Government, in accordance with other laws at the time [Act No. 648, 627 and 190].

Act No. 627 provides prescription to lands not exceeding 16 ha for obtaining right to ownership. In the case at Bar, the land is beyond the
limit of 16 ha [40 ha following Carios contention or 28 ha following the possessory information]. Thus, the judgment denying issuance of
title to Cario is in accordance with these new laws, having been in excess of what Congress intended.