FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 237605. March 25, 2019.]
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs.JUANA GADAPAN-ALFORQUE, CARMELITA GADAPAN-PUJENO AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF CEBU CITY, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated March 25, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 237605 (REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. JUANA GADAPAN-ALFORQUE, CARMELITA GADAPAN-PUJENO and THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF CEBU CITY, Respondents.) — After a careful review of the arguments raised by the petitioner in its Motion for Reconsideration (of the Resolution dated June 4, 2018), 1 we find no cogent reason to grant the same.
The Republic maintained that Lot No. 16061 is classified as timberland and therefore inalienable and not subject to disposition. Accordingly, the case should be remanded to the trial court to provide the Republic with an opportunity to present the Land Classification Map No. 2124. 2
The formal offer in evidence of the land classification map is vital in a case for reversion. 3 However, the rules require that documentary evidence must be formally offered to give the adverse party the opportunity to examine and oppose the admissibility of the same. 4 Fair play dictates that all parties, even the Government, are bound by the rules on formal offer of evidence. 5
The Court notes herein that the petitioner did not explain why it failed to present LC Map No. 2124 as evidence during trial. As such, we do not see any basis to order a remand of the case and allow the belated presentation of evidence that was available to the petitioner during trial.
WHEREFORE, the Court DENIES the Motion for Reconsideration and AFFIRMS the Resolution dated June 4, 2018.
The petitioners' payment of legal fees in the total amount of P1,000.00 for Sheriff's Trust Fund, as evidenced by O.R. No. 0221443-SC-EP dated August 7, 2018, is NOTED. AaCTcI
SO ORDERED." Jardeleza, J., on official business.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 66-82.
2.Id. at 67-68.
3.Republic v. Espinosa, G.R. No. 186603, April 5, 2017, 822 SCRA 317.
4.Id. at 327-328.
5.Id. at 333.