You're currently signed in as:
User
Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c1db5?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO](https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c1db5?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c1db5}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. 35776, Aug 21, 1931 ]

DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO +

DECISION

55 Phil. 974

[ G. R. No. 35776, August 21, 1931 ]

THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, IN BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, PETITIONER, VS. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO, JUDGE ACTING IN VACATION IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF NUEVA ECIJA, AND AMBROSIO MANUEL, RESPONDENTS.

D E C I S I O N

IMPERIAL, J.:

This certiorari proceeding was instituted by the Director of Lands, represented by the Attorney-General, to annul and set  aside the order of March 28, 1931, and the partial decision of May 18th of the same year, rendered by the respondent judge of the Court of First Instance, cancelling the decision rendered on December  21,  1922 in  cadastral case No. 13 of the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija, G. L. R. O. cadastral record No. 282,  declaring lot No. 1368 to be public land, in  pursuance whereof the respondent Ambrosio Manuel's answer was admitted, and the lot aforesaid adjudicated to him.

On December 21, 1922, a decision was rendered in cadas- tral case No. 13 of the Court of First Instance of  Nueva Ecija, G. L. R. O. cadastral record No. 282,  entitled "The Government of the Philippine Islands, petitioner, vs. Artemio Abaya et al., claimants," declaring cadastral lot No. 1368 to be public land.   On February 7,  1930, the Philippine Legislature passed Act No. 3672, entitled "An  Act to authorize the filing in the proper court, under certain conditions, of certain claims of title to parcels of land that have been declared public land, within the period of one year from the date of the promulgation of this Act."   Section 2 of said  law provides that said Act shall  take  effect  on the date when the Governor-General shall by means of a proclamation, announces that  it has  been expressly  or  tacitly approved by the President of the United States as provided in the Act of Congress of August 29, 1916.   Pursuant to this provision, on February 28,  1930, the Governor-General issued  proclamation No.  299, published  on March 8, 1930, in Vol. 28, No. 29, page 817 of the Official Gazette, announcing that the President of the United States had approved Act No. 3672 on February 7, 1930.   On March  26, 1930, the Governor-General issued proclamation No. 307, which was published on April 5th of that year in Vol. 28, No. 11, page 1252 of the Official Gazette, stating that Act No. 3672 was actually  approved by  the  President  of the United States on February 17, 1930, and not on the 7th of  that month, as erroneously transmitted by radio, and that the former  proclamation  was  thereby amended  accordingly. On March 12, 1931, the respondent Manuel filed a motion in cadastral case No. 13 praying that the order of general default entered in the case, as well as the decision with reference to cadastral lot No.  1368  be set  aside, and  that after admitting his answer and the supporting evidence, the parcel of land be adjudicated to him.  On March 28th of that year, the respondent judge entered an order cancelling the decision declaring lot No. 1368 to be public land, and admitting Manuel's answer.  On April 13th of the same year, the petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration praying for the revocation of the order of March 28th, alleging that the motion of  the respondent  Manuel had  been  filed after the one-year period granted by law.  The motion for reconsideration was denied  by the respondent judge on the 18th of that month.  And on May 18,1931, said respondent judge, after hearing the  evidence, rendered a partial decision in said cadastral proceeding adjudicating lot No. 1368 to Ambrosio Manuel.

On July 25,1931, the petitioner filed his amended petition, which was admitted through a resolution of this Supreme Court dated the 30th of the month.  On August 10th, the respondents also filed  an amended  answer, which must be admitted  for  the  purposes of  this  decision.  In  said amended answer the respondents set up as a special defense the promulgation of proclamation No. 307 by the Governor-General.

The only question arising from the facts set forth in the pleadings is whether  the motion filed by the respondent Manuel on March 12, 1931, was filed within the one-year period fixed in section 1 of Act No. 3672, and this point involves, in turn,  the computation  of  said  period.  The Attorney-General argues that the period should be counted from February 28, 1930, the date of proclamation No. 299. The respondents contend that said period should be computed from the date of the publication of Act  No. 3672 in the Official Gazette, which took place on March 18, 1930.

Proclamation No. 307, verbatim, reads as follows:

"BY THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL  OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS A PROCLAMATION

"No. 307. Amending Proclamation  No. 299,  series of 1930


"The original of Act Numbered Three thousand six hundred and seventy-two having been received from the Bureau of Insular Affairs at Washington, D. C, and it appearing thereon that the said Act  was formally and actually approved by the President of the United States on  February seventeenth, instead of February seventh, nineteen hundred and thirty, as this office was erroneously informed by radio on February nineteenth, Proclamation Numbered Two hundred and ninety-nine, dated February twenty-eighth, nineteen hundred  and thirty,  is  hereby  amended to read as follows:
" 'Pursuant to the provisions of section two of Act Numbered Three thousand six hundred and seventy-two, I hereby give public notice of the approval by the President  of the United States  on February seventeenth, nineteen hundred and thirty, as  provided  in section nine  of the Act of Congress of  August twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and six- teen, of Act of the Philippine Legislature Numbered Three thousand six hundred and seventy-two, entitled "An Act to authorize the filing in the proper court, under certain conditions, of certain claims of title to parcels of land that have been declared  public land,  within the period of  one year from the date of the  promulgation of this Act. "
"In witness  whereof,  I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands to be affixed.

Director of Lands vs. Ocampo and Manuel

"Done at the City of Manila, this  twenty-sixth day of March,  in  the year of our  Lord nineteen hundred  and thirty.

"[SEAL]
"DWIGHT F. DAVIS
"Governor-General"
It will be observed that the prime and sole object of this proclamation was to correct the error incurred in proclama- tion No. 299 by the statement that the law had  been approved on the 7th of February, 1930, by the President of the United States, instead of the  17th of that month and year. The amendment was substantial in so far as it  had  reference to the date  of the President's approval of  said  law, and that date was a basis for the issuance of the proclamation of the Governor-General, which  date, in  turn, would determine  when the aforesaid law took effect.   For  this reason, proclamation No. 307  must be understood to have abrogated,  by  amendment, proclamation No. 299,  and this being so, the commencement of said period must be the date, not of the  first proclamation, nor of the publication of the law in the  Official  Gazette, but of the  second  proclamation or,  March 26,  1930.  As a corollary of this, it follows  that the motion of the  respondent Ambrosio Manuel was  filed within the one-year period provided  by law, and hence, the order of March 28, 1931, and the partial decision of May 18th,  rendered by the respondent judge are valid and lawful, and in rendering them, he did  not exceed his jurisdiction or abuse his discretion.

Admitting, then, the amended answer  filed by the respondents  on  August 10,  1931,  the writ  of certiorari  is denied, without special pronouncement of costs.  So  ordered.

Avanceña, C. J.,  Johnson, Street, Malcolm,  Villamor, Romualdez, and Villa-Real, JJ., concur.

tags