Director of Lands Vs Bisnar

G.R. No.
83609, October
26, 1989
DIRECTOR
OF
LANDS,
PETITIONER, VS. COURT OF
APPEALS, IBARRA, BISNAR AND
AMELIA BISNAR, Respondent.
Facts:
In their joint application for registration of
title to two (2) parcels of land filed on July 20,
1976, the applicants Ibarra and Amelia
Bisnar claimed to be the owners in fee simple
of Lots 866 and 870 of the Pilar Cadastra,
containing an area of 28 hectares (284,424
sq.m.) and 34 hectares (345,385 sq.m.)
situated in barrio Gen. Hizon, Municipality of
President Roxas, Province of Capiz (p. 14,
Rollo). The applicants alleged that they
inherited those parcels of land (p. 41, Rollo)
and they had been paying the taxes thereon
(p. 40, Rollo).
The Director of Lands and the Director of the
Bureau of Forest Development, opposed the

application.
On February 24, 1977, the applicants filed an
amended application, which was approved on
March 14, 1977, and included the following
allegation:
"Should the Land Registration Act invoked be
not applicable to the case, they hereby apply
for the benefits of Chapter 8, Commonwealth
Act 141, as amended, as they and their
predecessors-in-interest
have
been
in
possession of the land as owners for more
than fifty (50) years." (p. 16, Rollo.)
After hearing, the trial court ordered the
registration of the title of the lots in the
names of the applicants, herein private
respondents.
On appeal, the Appellate Court affirmed the
trial court's decision.
Issue:
Whether the lots in question may
registered under Section 48(b) of CA 141
be
Ruling:
In the case of Bureau of Forestry vs. Court of
Appeals, 153 SCRA 351, we ruled:
"As provided for under Section 6 of
Commonwealth Act 141, which was lifted
from Act 2874, the classification or
reclassification of public lands into alienable
or disposable, mineral or forest lands is now
a prerogative of the Executive Department of
the government and not the courts. With
these rules, there should be no more room
for doubt that it is not the court which
determines the classification of lands of the
public domain into agricultural, forest or
mineral but the Executive Branch of the
government, through the Office of the
President. Hence, it was grave error and/or
abuse of discretion for respondent court to
ignore the uncontroverted facts that (1) the
disputed area is within a timberland block,
and (2) as certified to by the then Director of
Forestry, the area is needed for forest
purposes." (pp. 21-22, Rollo.)
It bears emphasizing that a positive act of the
government is needed to declassify land

which is classified as forest and to convert it
into alienable or disposable land for
agricultural or other purposes (Republic vs.
Animas, 56 SCRA 499). Unless and until the
land classified as forest is released in an
official proclamation to that effect so that it
may form part of the disposable agricultural
lands of the public domain, the rules on
confirmation of imperfect title do not apply
(Amunategui vs. Director of Foresty, 126
SCRA 69; Director of Lands vs. Court of
Appeals, 129 SCRA 689; Director of Lands vs.
Court of Appeals, 133 SCRA 701; Republic vs.
Court of Appeals, 148 SCRA 480; Vallarta vs.
Intermediate Appellate Court, 151 SCRA
679).
Thus, possession of forest lands, however
long, cannot ripen into private ownership
(Vano vs. Government, 41 Phil. 161 [1920].
Section 48 (b) of Commonwealth Act No. 141,
as amended, applies exclusively to public
agricultural land. Forest lands or areas
covered with forests are excluded (p. 26,
Rollo). We reiterate our ruling in Amunategui
that:
"In confirmation of imperfect title cases, the

applicant shoulders the burden of proving
that he meets the requirements of Section
48, Commonwealth Act No. 141, as amended
by Republic Act 1942. He must overcome the
presumption that the land he is applying for
is part of the public domain but that he has
an interest therein sufficient to warrant
registration in his name because of an
imperfect title such as those derived from old
spanish grants or that he has had continuous,
open
and
notorious
possession
and
occupation of agricultural lands of the public
domain under a bona fide claim of acquisition
of ownership for at least thirty (30) years
preceding the filing of his application." (Heirs
of Amunategui vs. Director of Forestry, 126
SCRA 69.)

Director of Lands Vs Bisnar

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Director of Lands Vs Bisnar

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Director of Lands Vs Bisnar

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. No.

Bureau of Forest Development, opposed the

government is needed to declassify land

"In confirmation of imperfect title cases, the

You might also like