RAMOS VS. DIRECTOR OF LANDS- Adverse Possession
The general rule is that possession and cultivation of a portion of a tract of land under the claim of ownership of all is a constructive possession of all, if the remainder is not in the adverse possession of another.
FACTS:
Restituo Romero gained possession of a considerable tract of land located in Nueva Ecija. He took advantage of the Royal Decree to obtain a possessory information title to the land and was registered as such.
Parcel No. 1 included within the limits of the possessory information title of Romero was sold to Cornelio Ramos, herein petitioner.
Ramos instituted appropriate proceedings to have his title registered.
Director of Lands opposed on the ground that Ramos had not acquired a good title from the Spanish government.
Director of Forestry also opposed on the ground that the first parcel of land is forest land.
It has been seen however that the predecessor in interest to the petitioner at least held this tract of land under color of title.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the actual occupancy of a part of the land described in the instrument giving color of title sufficient to give title to the entire tract of land?
HELD:
The general rule is that possession and cultivation of a portion of a tract of land under the claim of ownership of all is a constructive possession of all, if the remainder is not in the adverse possession of another.
The claimant has color of title; he acted in good faith and he has open, peaceable, and notorious possession of a portion of the property, sufficient to apprise the community and the world that the land was for his enjoyment.
Possession in the eyes of the law does not mean that a man has to have his feet on every square meter of ground before it can be said that he is in possession.
Ramos and his predecessor in interest fulfilled the requirements of the law on supposition that the premises consisted of agricultural public land.
On the issue of forest land, Forest reserves of public land can be established as provided by law. When the claim of the citizen and the claim of the government as to a particular piece of property collide, if the Government desires to demonstrate that the land is in reality a forest, the Director of Forestry should submit to the court convincing proof that the land is not more valuable for agricultural than for forest purposes.
In this case, the mere formal opposition on the part of the Attorney-General for the Director of Forestry, unsupported by satisfactory evidence will not stop the courts from giving title to the claimant.
Petitioner and appellant has proved a title to the entire tract of land for which he asked for registration.
Registration in the name of the petitioner is hereby granted.
