Scribd
Upload
110 views1 page

Facts:: 30. Republic of The Philippines vs. Zenaida Guinto-Aldana G.R. No. 175578, August 11, 2010

Respondents filed an application for registration of title over two pieces of land, claiming succession from their predecessors who had possessed the land since 1937. They provided tax declarations and receipts showing consistent payment of real estate taxes under their and their predecessors' names. Petitioner opposed on grounds that tax documents did not prove bona fide acquisition or prior possession as owner. The court ruled in favor of respondents, finding that tax declarations and payments since 1937 indicated possession as owners, as one does not pay taxes for property not in their possession, and that respondents' possession had been open, continuous, peaceful and uncontested.

Uploaded by

sophiabarnachea
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
110 views1 page

Facts:: 30. Republic of The Philippines vs. Zenaida Guinto-Aldana G.R. No. 175578, August 11, 2010

Respondents filed an application for registration of title over two pieces of land, claiming succession from their predecessors who had possessed the land since 1937. They provided tax declarations and receipts showing consistent payment of real estate taxes under their and their predecessors' names. Petitioner opposed on grounds that tax documents did not prove bona fide acquisition or prior possession as owner. The court ruled in favor of respondents, finding that tax declarations and payments since 1937 indicated possession as owners, as one does not pay taxes for property not in their possession, and that respondents' possession had been open, continuous, peaceful and uncontested.

Uploaded by

sophiabarnachea
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

30. Republic of the Philippines vs.

 Zenaida Guinto-Aldana
G.R. No. 175578, August 11, 2010
 
FACTS:
 
Respondents filed an application for registration of title over 2 pieces of land, professing
themselves to be co-owners of these lots having acquired them by succession from their
predecessors. That until the time of the application, they and their predecessors-in-interest have
been in actual, open, peaceful, adverse, exclusive and continuous possession of these lots in
the concept of an owner and that they had consistently declared the property in their name for
purposes of real estate taxation. In support of their application, respondents submitted to the
court the pertinent tax declarations, together with the receipts of payment thereof. Petitioner
opposed the application for the reason that the tax declaration submitted to the court did not
constitute competent and sufficient evidence of bona fide acquisition in good faith or of prior
possession in the concept of an owner.
 
ISSUE:
WON respondents have occupied and possessed the property openly, continuously, exclusively
and notoriously under a bona fide claim of ownership.
 
HELD:
Respondents’ possession through their predecessors-in-interest dates back to as early
as 1937 when the property had already been declared for taxation by respondent’s father.
Respondents could have produced more proof of this kind had it not been for the fact that, the
relevant portions of the tax records on file with the Provincial Assessor had been burned when
its office was razed by fire in 1997. With the tax assessments therecame next tax
payments. Respondents’ receipts for tax expenditures were likewise in therecords and in these
documents the predecessors of respondents were the named owners of the property. Tax
declarations and realty tax payment are not conclusive evidence ofownership, nevertheless,
they are a good indication of possession in the concept of an owner. No one in his right mind
would be paying taxes for a property that is not in his actual or at least constructive
possession. Indeed, respondents herein have been in possession of the land in the concept of
an owner, open, continuous, peaceful and without interference and opposition from the
government or from any private individual. Itself makes their right thereto unquestionably settled
and hence, deserving of protection under the law.

You might also like