JUDICIAL

CONFIRMATION OF
IMPERFECT TITLE
GOVERNING PROVISION: SECTION 48 (B) OF
CA NO 141
 Applies exclusively to alienable and disposable
agricultural lands of the public domain.
 WHO MAY APPLY?

Those who are in open, continuous, exclusive and

notorious possession and occupation under a
bonafide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945.
 PERIOD OF POSSESSION: HISTORICAL
BACKGROUND
1. Originally, section 48(b) of CA 141 provided for
possession and occupation of lands the public domain
since July 26, 1984.
2. RA 1942, provided for a simple 30 year prescriptive
period of occupation by an applicant for judicial
confirmation of imperfect title.
3. PD 1073 (January 25, 1977), presently requires for
judicial confirmation of imperfect or incomplete title,
the possession and occupation of the piece of land by
the applicants, by themselves, or through their
predecessors-in-interest since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
(Tan vs. republic)
 REQUISITES FOR CONFIRMATION OF
IMPERFECT TITLE:
1. The land must be alienable and disposable.
2. Open, continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession of the land by the applicant.
3. Since June 12, 1945
 REPUBLIC VS. DILOY

FACTS:
Involves a parcel of land with an area of 22,249 sq.
m.
The subject property was occupied and possessed
by her predecessors-in-interest beginning 1948.
1997- filed an application for registration.
The land became alienable and disposable on
March 15, 1982.
RULINGS:
Diloy failed to prove that she or her predecessors-
in-interest were in possession of the subject property
under a bonafide claim of ownership since June
12,1945 or earlier, which is the reckoning period
provided in Section 14(1) of PD 1529. Thus, it lacks
the third requisite.
They cannot apply for confirmation of imperfect
title even if they occupied it since 1948 because
during those period, the subject property had not
yet been classified as alienable and disposable.
 REPUBLIC VS. IMPERIAL CREDIT

Reckoning date under the Public Land Act as

amended for the acquisition of ownership of public
land.
 MALABANAN VS. REPUBLIC

2 ways to acquire property:

1. Section 14(1)
Those who have by themselves or through their
predecessors in interest have been in open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and
occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the
public domain under a bonafide claim of ownership
since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
2. Section 14(2)
Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by
prescription under the provisions of existing laws.
 PUBLIC DOMINION

Those intended for public use such as roads,

canals, rivers, torrents, ports and bridges
constructed by the state, banks, shores, roadstead
and others of similar character.

Those which belong to the state, without being for

public use, and are intended for some public
service or for the development of the national
wealth.
 WHEN PUBLIC DOMAIN LANDS
BECOME PATRIMONIAL PROPERTY ?

express government manifestation that the

property is already patrimonial or no longer
retained for public service or the development of
national wealth.
WHEN PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD BEGIN TO
RUN?
Only when the property has become patrimonial
 CADASTRAL PROCEEDINGS

Purpose:
to serve the public interest by requiring that the
titles to any unregistered lands be settled and
adjudicated.

Nature: in rem

Subject Matter: any lands whether public or private.

Specifically refers to any unregistered lands.
WHAT IS THE JURISDICTION OF THE
CADASTRAL COURT TO LANDS
ALREADY REGISTERED ?
limited to the necessary correction of technical
errors in the description of the lands, provided such
corrections do not impair the substantial rights of
the registered owner.

( Widows and Orphans vs CA)

 WIDOWS AND ORPHANS VS. CA

RULINGS:
The rule that a land registration court has no
jurisdiction over parcels of land already covered by
certificate of title. Applies only where there exists no
serious controversy as to the certificates
authenticity vis--vis the land covered therein.

 PAMINTUAN VS. SAN AGUSTIN

FACTS:
Pamintuan was the owner of lot no. 625 and a
Certificate of Title no. 540 was issued to him in June
1918.
1919, the lot was awarded to the Espinosas.
Filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with a prayer
that the cadastral case be declared void.
1920, writ of preliminary injunction was issued
against the respondents.
RULINGS:
In cadastral cases, the jurisdiction of the court over
lands already registered is limited to the necessary
correction of technical errors in the description of
the lands, provided such corrections do not impair
the substantial right of the registered owner and
that such jurisdiction cannot operate to deprive a
registered owner of his title.
 GABRIEL VS. CA

FACTS :
1909, survey was made on the land of Quimson
(687,360 sq.m).
February 1919 to March 1920, cadastral survey.
Increase of 17, 053 sq.m.
Overall- 704, 413 sq.m.
1. Lot 363-A ( 209,250 sq.m.)
2. Lot 363-B (495,163 sq.m.)
1916, Survey plan for Gabriel.
RULINGS:
Court has the power to determine the priority of
overlapping or over-laying registered titles.
This is necessary for a complete settlement of the
title to the land, which is the express purpose of
cadastral proceedings and must therefor, be
considered within the jurisdiction of the courts.