[ G.R. No. 2527, October 01, 1908 ]
LUCAS CARRILLO Y VELAZQUEZ, PETITIONER AND APPELLEE, VS. THE INSULAR GOVERNMENT ET AL., RESPONDENTS AND APPELLANTS.
D E C I S I O N
WILLARD, J.:
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 20 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 Famintuan 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.[1]
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.
According to the patent, the first tract of land contained 20 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 Famintuan 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.[1]
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.