FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 204161. February 25, 2015.]
FLORITA G. VENTURA, petitioner, vs. SPOUSES EDGAR D. MACASUCOL AND MELANIA MACASUCOL, SPOUSES GREGORIO GACUSAN AND LUCITA OFIAZA, AND THE HEIRS OF SPOUSES SOLEDAD AND BENITO GAYO, NAMELY, ORLANDO GAYO, ET AL., respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated February 25, 2015which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 204161 (Florita G. Ventura v. Spouses Edgar D. Macasucol and Melania Macasucol, Spouses Gregorio Gacusan and Lucita Ofiaza, and the heirs of Spouses Soledad and Benito Gayo, namely, Orlando Gayo, et al.). — After a review of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition and AFFIRM the June 14, 2012 Decision 1 and October 23, 2012 Resolution 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No. 93568 for failure of Florita G. Ventura (petitioner) to show that the CA committed any reversible error in denying her appeal.
As correctly ruled by the CA, petitioner lost her right to recover possession of the subject property due to laches, considering the fact that she, despite having lived only 30 meters away therefrom, took almost 25 years since her dispossession to assert her claim over the same. Notably, the Court has held in several cases that the ownership of registered land may be lost thru laches. 3aASDTE
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Rollo, pp. 32-52. Penned by Associate Justice Rebecca de Guia-Salvador with Associate Justices Normandie B. Pizarro and Rodil V. Zalameda, concurring.
2. Id. at 54-55.
3. See Marcelino v. CA, G.R. No. 94422, June 26, 1992, 210 SCRA 444, 447; citation omitted.