ADVERTISEMENT
EN BANC
[G.R. No. 2527. October 1, 1908.]
LUCAS CARRILLO Y VELAZQUEZ, petitioner-appellee, vs. THE INSULAR GOVERNMENT, ET AL., respondents-appellants.
Attorney-General Araneta for the Government.
Carlos Ledesma for appellee.
SYLLABUS
1. REGISTRATION OF LAND; PROOF OF OWNERSHIP. — The petitioner for registration in the Court of Land Registration attempted to prove his ownership of 107 hectares of land by presenting a patent from the Spanish Government for 26 hectares. Held, That the evidence did not prove that the land described in the petition was the same land described in the patent.
D E C I S I O N
WILLARD, J p:
This is an appeal from the Court of Land Registration. The plaintiff asked to have registered in his name two tracts of land, the first containing 107 hectares, and the second containing 74 hectares. The only evidence which he presented to prove his ownership was a patent from the Spanish Government issued on the 5th day of June, 1895, in proceedings for the adjustment of public lands. The grant made by this patent was not gratuitous, but the petitioner paid for the land.
According to the patent, the first tract of land contained 26 hectares. According to the petition presented in this proceeding it now contains 107 hectares. According to the patent the second tract contained 38 hectares. According to the petition it now contains 74 hectares.
This case is very similar to the cases of Pamintuan vs. The Insular Government (8 Phil. Rep., 485); Pamintuan vs. The Insular Government (8 Phil. Rep., 512), and Paras vs. The Insular Government, No. 2525, just decided. In this case, as in the others, the petitioner failed to prove that the lands described in his petition are the same lands described in the patents. The judgment in his favor, therefore, can not be sustained. It is accordingly reversed and the case is remanded to the court below for further proceedings in which the petitioner will have an opportunity of bringing himself, if he can, within the provisions of section 54 of Act No. 926. No costs will be allowed to either party in this case. So ordered.
Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa, Carson and Tracey, JJ., concur.
1. Page 378, supra.