This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-08-05 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| In Republic v. Heirs of Dorotea Montoya,[78] the only evidence presented to prove occupation and possession from 1940 was a tax declaration for year 1947 with notation that realty tax payments were paid since 1940.[79] This court discussed that "[a] tax declaration, much less a tax declaration the existence of which is proved by means of an annotation, is not a conclusive evidence of ownership, which is, at best, only a basis for inferring possession."[80] | |||||
|
2013-11-18 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Second, even if we were to consider the RCAM's tax declarations as basis for inferring possession,[36] the RCAM still failed to prove actual possession of the property for the required duration. As already noted, the earliest tax declaration that it presented was for 1948. We are in fact inclined to believe that the RCAM first declared the property in its name only in 1948 as this tax declaration does not appear to have cancelled any previously-issued tax declaration. Thus, when it filed its application in 1966, it was in possession of the property for only eighteen years, counted from 1948. Even if we were to count the possession period from the filing of its amended application in 1974, its alleged possession (which was only for twenty-six years counted from 1948) would still be short of the thirty-year period required by Section 48(b) of C.A. No. 141, as amended by R.A. No. 1942. The situation would be worse if we were to consider the amendment introduced by P.D. No. 1073 to Section 48(b) where, for the RCAM's claimed possession of the property to give rise to an imperfect title, this possession should have commenced on June 12, 1945 or earlier. | |||||