ORDER OF THE THIRD ALIAS WRIT

OF EXECUTION, POSSESSION
AND DEMOLITION
WITH DISMISSAL
TO MOTION FOR RELIEF
OF THE
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT

May 28, 1989

 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
Branch 111, Pasay City

WILSON P. ORFINADA ) LRC/CIVIL CASE No. 3957-P

P l a i n t i ff
) For: Quieting of
-vs- ) Titles/Reconveyance of
MACARIO RODRIGUEZ AND HEIRS ) Real Properties with
THE HEIRS OF DON MIGUEL AND ) Reconstitution
HERMOGENES ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ ) of TCT No.T-408/TCT No.
DONA AURORA FABELA Y CARDONA ) T-409 in accordance with RA
PATRICIA TIONGSON AND HEIRS ) No. 26 in the
PONCIANO PADILLA AND HEIRS ) name of Don
FELIMON AGUILAR AND THE HEIRS ) Gregorio
FORTUNATO SANTIAGO AND MARIA ) Madrigal Acop
PANTALEONA P.SANTIAGO AND HEIRS ) and Don Esteban
MARCOS ESTANISLAO AND MAURICIO ) Benitez Tallano
DE LOS SANTOS/BLAS AND SEBASTIAN )
FAJARDO/ANTONIO/EULALIA RAGUA )
DON MARIANO SAN PEDRO Y ESTEBAN )
AND MARIA SOCORRO CONDRADO HEIRS )
THE HEIRS OF FLORENCIA RODRIGUEZ )
ESTEBAN BENITEZ TALLANO, ET. AL., )
ENGRACIO SAN PEDRO AND HEIRS )
THE ADMINISTRATOR OF BICUTAN )
MARKET/MAYSILO ESTATE, ET. AL., )
PEDRO GREGORIO/AGAPITO BONSON )
AND HEIRS/BALBINO FRANCISCO )
PEDRO ROJAS ESTATE AND HEIRS )
EUGENIO MARCELO/JUAN JOSEF )
SANTIAGO GARCIA AND HEIRS )
MARIANO NONES AND HEIRS )
ORTIGAS AND COMPANY PARTNERSHIP )
THE ADMINISTRATOR OF PASAY AND )
TRIPLE ESTATES/AND THE MARICABAN )
ESTATE/PERPETUA AND PERFECTO )
AQUINO, ET. AL., ANTONIO FAEL )
THE ADMINISTRATOR OF SAN PEDRO )
ESTATE/JOSE SALVADOR/MAGNO )
FERNANDEZ/DONA LOURDES OCHOA Y )
CASAL, SIMONA ESTATE AND THE HEIRS )
EXEQUIEL DELA CRUZ AND HEIRS )
GERVACIO LOMBO, FRANCISCO SORIANO )
QUINTIN MEJIA/CATALINA ESTANISLAO )
AND THE HEIRS/JUAN CRUZ AND HEIRS )
GABINO JAVIER AND HEIRS )
THE MODESTO, EULALIO,TOMAS, )
APOLONIO, PEDRO, FRANCISCO, AND )
ANTONIO CRUZ, RAFAEL SARAO, )
JOSE OLIVER AND THE HEIRS )
DOMINADOR DE OCAMPO BUHAIN, ET.AL. )
MANUEL QUIOGUE, ESTANISLAO, )
EDUARDO AND BERNABE CARDOSO AND )
THE HEIRS, ANTONIO AQUIAL, )
FELIX AND CLAUDIO OSORIO AND HEIRS )
REGINO DELA CRUZ/GIL SANTIAGO )
MARCIANO TUAZON AND TUAZON AND )
COMPANY, JULIAN AND JUAN FRANSCISCO )

2
SARAO MOTORS/FRANCISCO MOTORS CORP )
PHILIPPINE SHARE COMPANY )
PILAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION )
TEODORO LIM, FELIX BAEZ AND HEIRS )
VALINTINO GAJUDO/CANDIDO CLEOFAS )
FORT WILLIAM MCKINLEY AND THE )
MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY )
UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES )
THRU HONORABLE SOLICITOR GENERAL )
THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND )
REGISTRATION COMMISSION )
THE HONORABLE DIRECTOR OF BUREAU )
OF LANDS, THE REPUBLIC OF THE )
PHILIPPINES )
AND TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN )
Defendants
DON ANNACLETO MADRIGAL ACOP )
JULIAN M. TALLANO )
Intervenors

x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

ORDER OF THIRD ALIAS WRIT OF EXECUTION, POSSESSION

AND DEMOLITION WITH DISMISSAL TO MOTION FOR

RELIEF OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT

In the preponderance of evidences by all the

parties in interest to substantiate with the virtue of justice

in the case at bar based on the Court records available, it

was firmly established that the allege ownership interest

of the Republic of the Philippines, over the land in

question is feeble it is Pro Defectu by lack of Primary

Evidence and Presumption of Law even if the Motion for

Reconsideration would be given due course as it was

asserted thru the office of the Hon. Solicitor General. But

if there be any doubtful conception as to the

3
Correctness of the Clarificatory Decision and Order

of this Honorable, particularly Judgment with

Compromise Agreement of February 4, 1974 and

January 19, 1976, the predicament is best be applied

to the prejudice of the herein movant, the Republic

of the Philippines because the Honorable Solicitor

General after submission of its proposal in behalf of

the Republic of the Philippines had entered with the

h e i r s o f l a t e P r i n c e J u l i a n M a c l e o d Ta l l a n o , o w n e r o f

t h e l a n d s e v i d e n c e d b y O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4 , w h e r e p o r t i o n

o f t h e l a n d s o w n b y D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o ,

c o v e r e d b y T C T N o . T- 4 9 8 , a n d t h a t D o n G r e g o r i o

M a d r i g a l A c o p , o w n e r o f t h e l a n d u n d e r T C T N o . T-

4 0 8 , t h r u B e n i t o A . Ta l l a n o , a j u d g m e n t w i t h

Compromise Agreement which was rendered on

February 4, 1972, hence, the Republic of the

Philippines is barred by Estopel and the pain of Res

Judicata. Instead, based on the Court records, the

movant tolerated the long period of time before its

motion for reconsideration had been filed on February

26, 1989, yet, it took a long overdue for more than

thirteen (13) years now before said motion has been

f i l e d f i n a l l y, p e r h a p s , n o t f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t b u t a

means of dilatory tactics to defeat the motion of the

I n t e r v e n o r f o r t h e i s s u a n c e o f T h i r d A l i a s Wr i t o f

4
Execution, Possession and Demolition.

That after February 4, 1972 Judgment with

Compromise Agreement, the Clarificatory Order was been

issued on November 4, 1975 that rectified the

Clarificatory Order of March 21, 1974 together with

its Clarificatory Decision which was issued on January

19, 1976 correcting, amending and reversing the

p r e v i o u s o n e b y o p e r a t i o n o f t h e l a w, s a i d d e c i s i o n ,

including that judgment with Compromise Agreement

dated February 4, 1972, and orders had been long

became final and executory on February 19, 1976, and

the same way properly executed on several occasions,

while that judgment of February 4, 1972 was executed

o n A p r i l 7 , 1 9 7 5 t h r u p r i v a t e s h e r i f f , A t t y. E p i t a c i o

Sobejana and another execution were rendered on

November 7, 1974 and on March 7, 1979 by virtue of

Writ of Execution, Possession and Demolition dated

September 10, 1974 where Court approval that deputized

A t t y. E p i t a c i o S o b e j a n a a s P r i v a t e S h e r i f f c e r t i f i e d b y

v i r t u e o f S h e r i ff ’s R e t u r n o f N o v e m b e r 1 7 , 1 9 7 5 a n d t h a t

ALIAS WRIT OF EXECUTION, POSSESSION AND

DEMOLITION dated October 8, 1978 and duly certified by

v i r t u e o f S h e r i ff ’s R e t u r n o f M a y 4 , 1 9 7 9 f o r a n d i n f a v o r

o f t h e I n t e r v e n o r s , M r. J u l i a n M . Ta l l a n o , D o n G r e g o r i o

5
Madrigal Acop and Don Annacleto Madrigal Acop. The

case at bar had been rested in peace for quite so long

and its judicial stability should be well respected in

toto without exemption.

Nevertheless, assuming therefore, the

Clarificatory Decision and Order in the case at bar is

Sine Perjuicio, it became final after the prescribed time

frame within which to perfect an appeal shall have

terminated accordingly or lapsed and that will, upon

the lapsation of 30 days from the days on which the

party who may appeal have been served with a required

notice of judgment. Indeed, after January 19, 1976,

Clarificatory Decision which reached to February 20,

1976, by the operation of the law said proceedings

supposed to become final on February 20, 1976. And

s i n c e t h e t i m e f o r a p p e a l i s f i x e d b y l a w, i t p r o v i d e s

an allowance by taking off there from the period during

which a Motion to set aside the judgment or for

r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n h a s b e e n p e n d i n g . A s s u m i n g , m o r e o v e r,

that the judgment is erroneous, except when such facts

were really recorded and the attention of this

Honorable Court had been usually called upon like

what the Intervenors had done previously calling the

a t t e n t i o n o f m y p r e d e c e s s o r, t h e n H o n . C F I J u d g e

6
Enrique Agana that many times asserting their rights

for correction on November 4, 1975 before lapse of

t i m e , s u c h e r r o r, u n l e s s j u r i s d i c t i o n a l c o u l d h a v e

been corrected by regular appeal within the time

f r a m e . N a t u r a l l y, D e c i s i o n s a n d O r d e r s , w h e t h e r

erroneous or not, became final after the time frame

a s f i x e d b y l a w, o t h e r w i s e , l i t i g a t i o n w o u l d b e f a t a l

to all when institution of justice would have no end,

yet, no court suit would be finally settled for justice,

a n d Ti t l e s t o p r o p e r t i e s a n d s u b j e c t i n t e r e s t i n v o l v e d

would, the same, become precarious if the government

a u t h o r i t y, f o r b a s e l e s s r e a s o n s , w o u l d b e a l l o w e d t o

re-open then anew said court proceedings which had

been long put into rest in accordance with the tenet

of jurisprudence (Daquis vs. Rusion, et. al., 913;

M a r a m b a v s . L o z a n o , 6 4 , O . G. 4 2 , O c t . 1 4 , 1 9 6 8 ) . I n

t h e c a s e ( P e o p l e v s . O l a r t e , G. R . N o . L 2 2 4 6 5 , F e b .

2 8 , 1 9 6 7 , 6 3 , O . G. , N o . 2 7 , p . 6 6 7 3 , J u l y 1 , 1 9 6 8 ;

SCRA 494). Even the Supreme Court can not even

change the doctrine adapted in the Interpretation of

the law affecting this subsequent case made by Justice

Tr i b u n a l o f a n y l e v e l . B e c a u s e , u n d e r s a i d c o u r t

litigation, it was held that the subsequent re-

interpretation of the law could be applied only to a

new case and certainly not to a case that had been long

7
resting and meritoriously resolved for a long time finally

and conclusively determined. In as much as judicial

d o c t r i n e h a v e o n l y p r o s p e c t i v e o p e r a t i o n . Ye t , p o s t e r i o r

changes in the doctrine of justice system by the Supreme

Court can not retroactively affect on amending or

nullifying a prior final decision in the same proceedings

where previous court litigation Ex- Acquitate done,

whether the case be civil or criminal in nature.

As it was observed by this Honorable Court,

there were an apparent strategic deception over the

m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e S o l i c i t o r i n t o d a y ’s m o t i o n

alleging that required court proceedings in the case

at bar had never held and it was purely a mistake of

t h e S O L G E N ’s S o l i c i t o r i n r e p l y i n g t h e J u d g m e n t i n

favor of the intervenors, while, they allege, there were

no proceedings at all which was a baseless ground in

t o t o . I t ’s o n t h e i r b u r d e n i f i t d e n y a p a r t y o f t h e i r

d a y i n c o u r t . B u t l e t ’s o p e n o u r e y e s t o a j u d i c i a l

wisdom in a case of Claveria vs. Honorable Palacio,

5 6 , O . G. , 2 1 6 1 a s m e n t i o n e d ;

“But while the rule is that the client

must suffer the consequence of the negligence

or incompetency of his counsel, this rule should

8
not be applied where this would result in denying

a party of his day in court or in preventing him

from fairly presenting his case.” (U. S. vs. Umali,

15, Phil. 33; U. S. vs. Dungca, 27, Phil., 274;

People vs. Manzanilla, et. Al., 43, Phil., 67; Mon-

t e s v s . R e g i o n a l T r i a l C o u r t o f Ta y a b a s , e t . a l . , 4 8 ,

P h i l . , 6 5 0 ; V i v e r o v s . S a n t o s , e t . a l . , 5 2 , O . G. ,

1924), especially where, as in the present case, the

intervenors has no evidence that the aggrieved

p a r t y, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e H o n o r a b l e S o l i c i t o r G e n e r a l ,

was guilty of dilatory tactics.

I n t h e c a s e a t b a r, t h e H o n o r a b l e S o l i c i -

tor General failed to file its motion for Reconsid-

eration within a time frame to prove their allega-

tion that were no proceedings. But why they failed

t o f i l e s u c h r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e l a w, t h a t c a u s e d

the Republic of the Philippines dented for its es-

sential days in Court, which was incontrovertible

on the circumstances that was held by Intermedi-

ate Appelate Court, to wit:

A decision rendered without giving a

p a r t y h i s d a y i n C o u r t i s N u l l a n d Vo i d

(Luz vs. Court of First Instance of

Ta c l o b a n , 7 7 P h i l . , 6 7 9 ) .

9
 We n e e d t o d i g e s t t h r u s u p p l e m e n t a l w o r d s

“ N u l l a n d Vo i d ” b e c a u s e t h e i n c i d e n t w o u l d n o t

be in conformity to the instant case, which;

“A judgment void upon its face and requiring

only an inspection of the record to

demonstrate its validity is a mere nullity and,

in legal effect, no judgment at all. Such

judgment has been characterized as a dead

limb in the judicial tree which may be chopped

off anytime, capable of bearing no fruit to

plaintiff but constituting a constant menace to

defendant”. ( I Freeman Judgment 643-645).

If we subscribe the defense of the

Honorable Solicitor General in the above entitled

case alleging that they have no knowledge over the

mistakes and negligence of their Solicitor, this

e n t i r e l y, p u r p o r t i n g t o d e c e p t i o n t h a t t h e r e w e r e n o

Court Proceedings, it would open a vacuum for a

lawyer to pass through in compromising their

clients’ cause to the preponderance of opposing

p a r t y i n i n t e r e s t . Ve r y c l e a r l y , t h e H o n o r a b l e

Solicitor General have a direct control over his

Solicitors considering the office they represented

is a government agency with paramount importance,

10
complete of legal staffs and lawyers including bounty

resources and facilities as a means for the defense to

seek justice in the interest of the general public as

our Constitution demands for it. But in spite of such

stability in their situation, still they missed to comply

t h e j u d i c i a l r e q u i r e m e n t s i n C o u r t . O n t h e c o n t r a r y,

the Republic of the Philippines, through its Solicitors,

I N D E E D A N D A C T U A L LY h a d t e c h n i c a l l y e m p l o y e d

t h e i r d e f e n s e b y t a k i n g C R O S S E X A M I N AT I O N t o t h e

I n t e r v e n o r, M r. J u l i a n M . Ta l l a n o , b e f o r e t h i s A m i c u s

Curae; and this Hon. Court, that later on such defense

served nullity to the government after the intervenor

re-affirmed their solid ownership interest over the

land in dispute, as follows:

(EXCERPT FROM CROSS EXAMINATION OF J. M. TALLANO

DATED JANUARY 7, 1974 BEFORE THE AMICUS CURAE)

Honorable Asst. Q . M r. Ta l l a n o , w h o i s i n p o s s e s -
Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez sion of the land covered by

t h a t T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d T C T

N o . T- 4 9 8 ?

Witness A. We a r e i n p o s s e s s i o n s i n c e
J. M. Tallano
the year 1764 up to the

p r e s e n t , S i r.

11
Honorable Asst. Q. On what way as you mentioned
Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez that you are in possession of the

land since 1764?

Witness A. Beside of its Torrens Titles TCT

J. M. Tallano
No. T–408 and that TCT No. T-498

and that OCT 01-4 which were

issued in the name of my

predecessors, the land land itself

has been tilling by my forefathers

since the year 1764 by planting

million of fruit bearing mango

trees, bananas, variety of fruit

bearing trees, pineapples,

sorghum, yellow corn and sugar-

canes and furtherly we are tilling

the land we inherited up to the

present time. Another point was

that my ancestors were the ones

who built such BALARA WATER

RESERVOIR and the Novaliches

Dam as our irrigating system to

our plants that forced the National

Government thru its late President

Manuel Roxas to en ter into

12
 yearly lease agreement with our

family since the year 1948 and it

was ended only in the year 1969.

Honorable Asst. Q. Who is paying the amelioration

Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez taxes of the land?

A. We were the one since the year 1948

Witness up to the year 1969 and it was

J. M. Tallano
stopped only when we were

afftected by sky rocketed rate of

assessment tax increases. In deep

sense, I have in possession 20

pieces of Realty Tax Receipts which

started in the year 1948 to 1969.

Honorable Asst. Q . M r. Ta l l a n o , y o u m e n t i o n e d
Solicitor Gen.
Gutierrez Solicitor Gen. Gutierez in your

testimonies in our previous hearing

that you’re the true and direct heir

of Don Esteban Benitez Tallano and

Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop, that

proof can you present to this

Honorable Court relevant to your

claim as direct descendants?

13
Witness A . A c t u a l l y, i n t h i s H o n o r a b l e
J. M. Tallano
S a l a , y o u r H o n o r, D o n E s t e b a n

B . Ta l l a n o , n o w i n h i s 9 8 t h

years of age, and Gregorio

Madrigal Acop, also in his

96th years of age, are both

physically present in this

H o n o r a b l e C o u r t S i r. T h a t

medium built old man wearing

white pant and white long

sleeves with white shoes and

with gold chain necklace and

wearing sunglasses is

prominently known as Don

E s t e b a n Ta l l a n o , C o m p a d r e o f

former President Diosdado

Macapagal, cousin of Irenea

Macaraeg of Binalonan,

Pangasinan, while, that fair

complexioned old man about

5’5” in height wearing beige

colored pants and red stripe

polo shirt also wearing

sunglasses with curly hairs and

also with big gold necklace

14
seated at the right side of Don

E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o i s

prominently known as Don

Gregorio Madrigal Acop, who

both signed a Court required

Sworn Affidavits recognizing me

being their Estate Judicial

Administrator, Your Honor. That

another document I have in my

present possession our Honor are

Certification by concurrent

Supreme Court Justice

H e r m o g e n e s C o n c e p c i o n , J r.

affirming the true name and

personal identity of my

predecessors, Don Esteban

Benitez Ta l l a n o and Don

Gregorio Madrigal Acop who

are also both Compadre of

the Hon. Chief Justice. And

another Certification issued

by former President of the

Philippines, Mr. Diosdado Macapagal,

now the President of the Con-

stitutional Convention affirming

15
the true name and personal

identity of the two prominent

Hacienderos, because that

time Ex-President Diosdado

M a c a p a g a l h a d a p p o i n t e d M r.

B e n i t o Ta l l a n o , m y f a t h e r, a s

his campaign manager that

made him garner a land slide

v o t e i n S a n J o s e C i t y, N u e v a

Ecija during his presidential

candidacy in the year 1961.

Along that time it caused a

connecting relation to Don

E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o , t h e

g r a n d f a t h e r o f B e n i t o Ta l l a n o ,

who is closer to the former

President of the Philippines of

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e m o t h e r- i n - l a w

of Ex-President Macapagal,

the second cousin of Don

E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o a n d

Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop of

Pangasinan and Bulacan, has

been known to him undoubtedly.

16
 N o w, perusal to all the facts and

circumstances in this Honorable Court, it has been

furtherly stressed a question on what grounds do the

Honorable Solicitor General could claim that the case

at bar had been predicated by judgment with no court

proceedings? Perhaps the Hon. Solicitor General

wants to plant merely confusion to this Honorable

Court of Justice toward re-opening of the case since

they are barred from stipulation and that its

“Judgment with Compromise Agreement” between the

Ta l l a n o H e i r s w o u l d b e e n t i r e l y a f f e c t e d b y w h i c h ,

if we will abide such strategic maneuver, it could be

considered an action for the reopening of the land

registration case or toward strategic proceedings

against such “Judgment with Compromise

Agreement”, but, again, the Doctrine of Res Judicata

barred the Honorable Solicitor General from doing

so. Because it was clearly in a case (Grey Alba vs.

dela Cruz, 17, Phil., 49, 1910) that Res Judicata is

applicable in registration proceedings with or without

oppositions instituted for the registration of a private

land, the judgment of the Court confirming the title

o f t h e a p p l i c a n t o r o p p o s i t o r, a s t h e c a s e m a y b e ,

and ordering its registration in his name or in the

name of successful litigant particularly late Prince

17
J u l i a n M a c l e o d Ta l l a n o o v e r t h i s O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4

constitutes, when final, Res Judicata against the whole

world because the Doctrine applies to all cases and

proceedings including Land Registration and Cadastral

proceedings (Royal Audiencia vs. Roman Catholic Church,

R. Ad. 1886).

The battle lines drawn appropriately from

the parties concern including the Hon. Solicitor

General were all judicially required remedies thru

their submitted pleadings and contra-pleadings and

evidences as they had been exercised such rights but

still it turned out futile they missed convincing

evidences for this Honorable Court to adopt it in toto

against the Intervenors.

Originally, it was long been resolved according

to judicial procedure that said TCT No. T-408 and that TCT

No. T-498 that has been derived from OCT 01-4 which was

issued by virtue of Royal Decree in favor of the intervenor ’s

predecessor, late Prince Julian Macleod Tallano, in the

year 1764 and the Royal Audiencia adjudicated finally

against the late Hermogenes Rodriguez in favor of said

Prince Julian Macleod Tallano on the year 1861 ended 1864,

yet, said Titles are titles from probative origin, and the

18
same had been passed thru crucial test by judicial

a ff i r m a t i o n o f t h e l a n d R e g i s t r a t i o n C o u r t d u r i n g t h e

corresponding approval and issuance of the said Decree

of Registration no. 297 on October 3, 1904. That on that

context, it had been granted accordingly, affirming, said

OCT 01-4 was valid from probative nature of land titles

of ownership prescribed by the Land Registration Act 496,

particularly, over the land in question – the KEYBIGA

(QUEBIGA) HACIENDA, which long became final upon

such decree of confirmation and registration that had been

entered, yet, it binds the land and quiet any title thereto

subject to Section 39 of Land Registration Act No. 496.

And it is a universal acceptance that it should be

conclusive upon and against all persons including the

government authority and all its agencies thereof, whether

it mentioned by the name in the notice or citation or

included in the general description “TO ALL WHOM IT

MAY CONCERN” because ACTION OF REGISTRATION

L I K E T H AT O F C A D A S T R A L H E A R I N G U N D E R R A

2259, WHERE THE SAME LAND HAD UNDERGONE, IS

AN ACTION IN REM, YET, CORRESPONDINGLY, IT IS

A NOTICE TO ALL THE WORLD.

I n d e e d , w h e n t h e i n t e r v e n o r ’s p r e d e c e s s o r s i n

interest obtained the decree of Registration and the

19
 r e c o r d i n g o f s a i d o r i g i n a l C e r t i f i c a t e o f Ti t l e O C T N o .

T- 0 1 - 4 , h a d b e e n d o n e j u d i c i o u s l y, i t h a d b e e n c o n s t r u e d

as an agreement running with subject lands and finally

binding upon the land owner and all successors in title

and interest, thereto, that the subject land should be and

always remain registered land in favor of the lawful

t r a n s f e r e e - o w n e r, e m b r a c i n g i t s e x p e d i e n c y Ti t l e s i n a s

m u c h a s s a i d Ti t l e s , T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d T C T N o . T- 4 9 8

a r e To r r e n s T i t l e s , p e r s e , c a n n o t b e s u b j e c t e d b y

prescription. In other words, prescription for a torrens

title is unavailing not only against its hereditary

successors but also to all persons claiming similar

rights against the owners and the herein intervenors.

To t h i s e f f e c t , t h e l a n d o w n e r s h i p u n d e r t h i s L a n d

Registration Act 496 and RA 2259 protected by the

D o c t r i n e o f R E S J U D I C ATA .

And along the same doctrine of ownership over

the land in question, it has also been long settled in the

c a s e a t b a r, t h a t t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s s t e a d i l y h e l d

vigorously in favor of the registered owners-intervenors

whose interest and legal rights over the subject land

had been acquired by virtue of judicial proceedings

and by way of principle of fee almpie as provided by

20
Maura Law under Royal Decree of February 10, 1894

in compliance with the Royal Decree of January 26,

1 8 8 9 , w h i c h i s n o w d u b b e d a s Ti t u l o d e C o m p r a . T h a t

possession over the properties in dispute originated

from more than 400 years since time immemorial, and

clearly having been registered as owners over the

subject land for more than two (2) centuries and having

possessed and titled the same during such period since

the year 1764 without adjustment. It became

indefeasible and imprescriptible against any one and

could not be disturbed by another court proceedings or

b y s t r a n g e r a l o n e i n d e r o g a t o r y t o s a i d Ti t l e s , V I C U R E

CUJUS, torrens title cannot be subjected for collateral

attack unless fraud would be an issue against said

Ti t l e s , B u t s u c h c l a i m s h o u l d b e f i l e d w i t h i n t h e t i m e

frame, one year after the date of the issuance of the

decree of registration or before it perfect its appeal but

such action must be direct, and not by collateral attack

or collateral proceedings which totally barred the

claimants of doing so. Like what happened in the case

of the Republic of the Philippines, thru its Hon.

Solicitor General, it lost its rights to assert its motion

for reconsideration or this Motion for Relief by virtue

o f t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e l a w.

21
 For purpose of record, on March 21, 1974,

this Hon Court rendered judgment in the above

entitled case in favor of the Intervenors, Julian M.

Ta l l a n o a n d A n n a c l e t o M a d r i g a l A c o p a n d n o t

Annacleto Madrigal Acopiado which this Court had

admitted it was a mere commission of clerical errors

on the ground that Annacleto Madrigal Acopiado is

different from Annacleto Madrigal Acop, a two

different persons, while that Annacleto Madrigal

Acopiado, his real Civil Registry is Annacleto

Montanez Acopiado, so this Hon. Court had corrected

this into Annacleto Madrigal Acop, the true

I n t e r v e n o r. A n d t h r u t h e M o t i o n o f t h e H o n . S o l i c i t o r

General, in behalf of the Republic of the Philippines,

dated November 7, 1975, and thru the motion of the

Intervenors also dated November 7, 1975 both parties

in interest urged this Honorable Court to correct and

rectify said Order dated November 4, 1975 on the

reasons as pleaded by the said Intervenors, the Hon.

Court, thru its stenographic clerks, committed grave

e r r o r s c l e r i c a l l y. W h i l e t h e c o n t e n t i o n o f t h e R e p u b l i c

of the Philippines, the Hon. Court failed to appreciate

the value of the new evidences of the government that

had been submitted against the Intervenors’ evidences.

22
 On the issue of jurisdictional requirement that

had been raised by the Republic of the Philippines through

its Hon. Solicitor General against the intervenors, alleging

that said party’s legal interest over the subject matter is

fatal and guilty for being failed to comply such docket

fee towards acquisition of Jurisdiction, said argument of

the Honorable Solicitor General for and in behalf of the

Republic of the Philippines is clearly beyond the tenet of

jurisprudence and law.

In a wider judicial wisdom which was

universally taken into practice by prominent luminaries

in the legal profession and, augmentedly augurs by the

Rule 141 Section 7 (a) of the Rules of Court as it stood

a t t h e t i m e o f f i l i n g o f c o m p l a i n a g a i n s t p e t i t i o n e r,

docket fees for ordinary action should be based on

the total sum claimed, exclusive of interest, or the

stated value of the property in litigation. Thus the

docket fees should be computed on the basis of the

value of the property and the amount of the related

damages claimed, exclusive of interest. Where the

action involves real property and a related claim for

damages as well, the legal fees should be assessed

on the basis of both (a) the value of the property and

23
(b) the total amount of the related damages sought (Tacay vs.

Regiona; Trial Court LRO, SCRA 433, 444 (1989). Thus on

that instances, the CFI then under my predecessor, which

decided the case at bar for Julian M. Tallano, et. al., Intervenor

required jurisdiction over the case filed by the Plaintiffs

Wilson P. Orfinada, et. al., Intervenor required jurisdiction

over the case filed by the Plaintiffs Wilson P. Orfinada, et

al., after the said plaintiff and satisfactorily completed the

payment of the said docket fees which the said Hon. Clerk of

Court was the one who computed said filing fees.

Besides, the Rules of Law related to the

jurisdictional requirements delves generally to all party in

interest in as much as the Plaintiff, Wilson P. Orfinada, in

his claim over the area of 1,203 hectares of raw land having

an assessed value of P10,000 per hectare sometime in 1962,

when the said complaint originated, had a total filing fee

of P25,000.00 including the cost of miscellaneous. For

humanitarian interest let us mend the agony of the

Intervenors, et. al., the victim of oppression and curtailment

of constitutional rights.

That the following real properties should be

recovered far and in favor of the ntervenors and Heirs,

t h e Ta l l a n o a n d A c o p c l a n s :

24
1. Parcels of lands covered by spurious Decree 35584

allegedly containing an area of 3,305.75 hectares,

evidenced by OCT 730 both in Mariquina, Quezon City

and Pasig, under Registration Book No. A-7in the

name of spurious land owners Marciano Severo

Tuazon, Juan Jose Tuazon, Natividad Zaragoza and

Augusto Huberto Y dela Paz;

2. A parcel of land spurious claims by the last defendant,

Don Mariano San Pedro, covered by Composicion Col

El Estado, OCT 4136 dated April 29, 1894,embracing

three (3) lots; Lot No. 103 with an area of 169,922

hectares, Lot No. 112 with an area of 169,562 hectares,

and Lot No. 113 with an area of 229,206 hectares, under

LRC, SWO – 15320 situated in the Capitol District,

Quezon City;

3. A parcel of land, Lot 1, Block 51, portion of a

spurious PSD-57020 and PSD-10532, Cadastral No.

7 6 8 1 , s i t u a t e d i n S i t i o B a g o B a n t a y, Q u e z o n C i t y

a l o n g C o n g r e s s i o n a l Av e n u e , b o u n d e d o n t h e S o u t h

by Line 1-2-3, by Block B-6, Northwest, by spurious

Decree 2084; on the North along line 3-4 by Culiat

C r e e k o n t h e We s t a n d N o r t h w e s t ; a l o n g 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8

by Lot 5, Block 51, on the East; along Line 8-1

25
 by road Lot 4, both of the Subdivision Plan,

containing an area of 24,097.60 square meters

evidenced by spurious Land Titles TCT

152000 from OCT 736,Decree No. 17431;

Bautista identified as Lot 1, fictitious Plan

PSU 65652, situated in Sitio Dilang, Cainta,

Rizal, containing an area of Seventy Five

Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Three (75,943)

square meters, and Lot No. 2, also of spurious

origin, PSU 65652 situated in the same area,

Sitio Dilang, Cainta, Rizal containing an area

of 19,552 sq. m. evidenced by spurious and

v o i d L a n d Ti t l e O C T 4 3 3 1 ;

5. A parcel of land covered by void Land

Title under OCT 735 and spuriously

claimed by Francisco B. Francisco

containing an area of 2,768.9521 square

meters but its technical description is

defective and in an open polygon affecting

the area of Quezon City land which was

covered by valid and lawful Land Title

TCT 498 from OCT 01-4 in the name of Don

E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o , t h a t h a d b e e n

26
 ex e c u t e d a n d t o o k o v e r f o r t h e p e r p e t u a l p o s s e s s i o n

o f t h e r i g h t f u l o w n e r, D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o

so the same should be repossessed by way of this

WRIT OF EXECUTION AND DEMOLITION;

6. A parcel of land, Lot 5, Block 8, respectively under

P l a n P S D 2 3 3 8 4 , p o r t i o n o f L o t 9 11 d e s c r i b e d i n

spurious Plan PCs-13, GLRO, situated in Quezon

C i t y, b o u n d e d o n t h e N o r t h b y L o t 4 , B l o c k 8 ; o n

the East by Lot 19, Block 8, on the South by Lot 2,

B l o c k 8 ; a n d o n t h e We s t b y s t r e e t L o t 4 , c o n t a i n i n g

an area of 387.20 hectares, more or less, spuriously

evidenced by TCT No. 300828 derived from OCT

614, which was declared null and void ab initio;

7. A parcel of land in Bo. Diliman, Quezon City

a l o n g L i n e 1 - 2 b y C o m m o n w e a l t h Av e n u e , o n

the East along Line 2-3 by Lot 4-B, also with

s p u r i o u s P S D - 1 0 0 1 4 ; o n We s t a l o n g L i n e 3 - 4 b y

Road, on the Northeast along Line 4-1 by Road,

containing an area of Seven Thousand Four

Hundred Seventy Eight (7,478) square meters,

evidenced by spurious TCT No. 305618 in the

n a m e o f P e d r o T. C a s i m e r o d e r i v e d f r o m O C T

730 which was declared null and void from

27
 the beginning by the Order of this Court, CFI

Branch 28, Pasay City under this LRC/Civil Case

No. 3957-P;

8. A parcel of land, Lot I-A of the spurious Subdivision

Plan PSd 18832, described on void PSd 4859

(G.L.R.O. Record 7681), containing an area of Thirty

Three Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three (33,623)

square meters, more or less, in the name of Deogracias

B. Babalaon under TCT 300828 derived from OCT 730

which was declared null and void ab initio;

9. A parcel of land situated in Sitio Tatlong Cawayan

containing an area of Two Thousand Eight Hundred

Ninety Eight (2,898) square meters and another Thirty

Seven Thousand Ninety Eight (37,098) square meters

evidenced by TCT 21100 in the name of Jesus Gomez

derived from OCT 589 which was declared null and

void ab initio;

10. A parcel of land containing an area of Three Hundred

Twenty (320) square meters, more or less, portion of

Block 12, Lot No. 169 of the spurious Pasay Estate,

bounded on the Northeast by Lot 341; on the Southeast

by Lot 331; on the Southwest by Lot 168 and on the

28
 Northwest by Lot 153; the same should be recovered

i n f a v o r o f t h e h e i r s , t h e Ta l l a n o , A c o p c l a n ;

11 . A p a r c e l o f l a n d , L o t N o . 1 4 3 7 - B o f t h e

Subdivision Plan, PSd-13684, which is spurious

i n n a t u r e b e i n g a p o r t i o n o f L o t 1 4 3 7 , G. L . R . O .

C a d . R e c . N o . 1 3 5 2 w h i c h w e r e v o i d i n c h a r a c t e r,

c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f O n e H u n d r e d Tw e n t y F i v e

(125) square meters in Pasay City Estate, bounded

on the Northeast by Lot 1436 of Pasay city

Cadastre; on the Southeast by Calle Chingxiang;

on the Southwest by Lot No. 1437-A of the

Subdivision Plan; on the Northwest by Lot 1417;

said lots covered by spurious documents should

be recovered by virtue of this Order in favor of

the legitimate owner;

12. A parcel of land, Lot 1 covered by spurious Plan

11-2939 situated in Bo. Barangca, Mariquina,

R i z a l , n o w, Q u e z o n C i t y, c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f

F o r t y T h r e e T h o u s a n d F o u r H u n d r e d S e v e n t y Tw o

(43,472) square meters allegedly in the name of

Fermina Castor evidenced by spurious TCT No.

43747, from fictitious OCT No. 393 which were

declared null and void ab initio;

29
13. A n o t h e r p a r c e l o f l a n d , L o t 2 o f v o i d 11 - 2 9 3 9

situated also in Bo. Barangca, Municipality of

M a r i q u i n a , n o w Q u e z o n C i t y, a l s o e v i d e n c e d b y

spurious TCT No. 43747 in the name of Fermina

Castor derived from OCT No. 393 which was declared

null and void ab initio;

14. A p a r c e l o f l a n d s i t u a t e d i n B o . A l m a n z a o f t h e

Municipality of Las PiHas, bounded on the Northeast

by Road, on the Southeast by the spurious claims-

p r o p e r t i e s o f Z a c a r i a s G r e g o r i o , To m a s E u s e b i o ,

Raymunda dela Cruz, all of declared spurious

claimants on the Southwest by the spurious land claims

of Raymunda dela Cruz and Sotero Trinidad; on the

We s t b y L o t N o . 2 ; a n d o n t h e N o r t h w e s t b y t h e

spurious land claims of Higino Espadilia, containing

an area of: for the Lot 1, 142,433 square meteres; for

the Lot 2, containing an area of 58,209 sq. m. allegedly

claim by Agapito Bonso covered by OCT 4085 which

were declared null and void ab initio;

15. A parcel of land, Lot 29 (LRC) PSd 29, portion of Plan

11-8152, situated in Bo. Guirayang, Municipality of

San Mateo, Province of Morong, now Rizal, bounded

on the Northeast point 2 to 3 by Lot No. 20; on the

30
 Southeast, point 3-4 by Lot 23; on the Southwest, point

4 to 1 by Lot 28, all of the Subdivision Plan and on

Northwest point 1 to 2 by PSU 32606, containing an

area of One Hundred Forty Three Thousand Five

Hundred Eighty Six (143,586) square meters, more

derived from OCT 2750 which were declared null and

void; or less, evidenced by TCT 110992 in the name of

Remedios I.Sunga

16. A) A p a r c e l o f l a n d s i t u a t e d i n S i t i o Tu b i g a n ,

Barangay Sorosoro of BiHan, Province of Laguna,

spuriously claim by Natalio Layos, but it should

be Salvador Layos, the original tenant in the area

of the Don Esteban Benitez Tallano Estate, portion

of Hacienda Quebega, containing an area of Four

Hundred Fifteen Thousand Six Hundred Thirty

(415,630) hectares; and

B) Another parcel of land under the same spurious

claimant Natalio Layos located in Sitio Tubigan,

Bo. Sorosoro, BiHan, Laguna, containing an area

of Seven Hundred Two Thousand Four Hundred

Thirteen (702,413) square meters;

17. A parcel of land situated in Bo. Canlogan, Pasig,

portion of spurious OCT 844 under spurious

31
 Decree 16858 containing an area of Fourteen

Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Four (14,274) square

meteres more or less, the same Decree and Land Title

OCT 844 were declared null and void ab initio;

18. A parcel of land situated in Caloocan, now Quezon

C i t y, c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f F o u r H u n d r e d T h i r t y

Nine hectares and Nine Thousand Three Hundred

Tw e n t y Tw o s q u a r e m e t e r s ( 4 3 9 . 9 3 2 2 h e c t a r e s ) ,

under spurious Plan II-4816, evidenced by spurious

OCT 632 in the name of Eulalio Ragua, et.al., which

was declared null and void ab initio;

19. A p a r c e l o f l a n d c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f O n e

Hundred Four hectares and Eight Thousand Eight

Hundred Fifty Four square meters (104.8854

hectares), more or less, evidenced by spurious

OCT 0-538 and OCT 561 which were declared null

and void ab initio in the name of Afable, et.al.,

a n d Vi l l a s i c a , e t . a l . , t h e a l l e g e d c l a i m a n t s ,

s i t u a t e d i n J u n t a l , Tu y, B a t a n g a s ;

20. A p a r c e l o f l a n d c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f 1 5 8

hectares situated in the Bo. of Pinagkawitan,

Lipa City bounded by Timbungan on the

32
 Northeast, on the Southwest is Tihero River, on the

South by Flores Garein evidenced by OCT 174, OCT

140, OCT 4553, OCT 4731, under Decree 641327,

641328, OCT 130 Decree No. 641328, OCT 0-117-P,

OCT 213 under Decree No. 52860, which were all

declared null and void ab initio should be recovered

for and in favor of the Tallano Estates;

21. A parcel of land containing an area of One Thousand

Seven Hundred Fifty (1, 750) hectares situated in Bo.

Caluangan Magallanes, Marigundon, Cavite, and area

of One Thousand Fifty (1, 050) hectares in Bo. Pacheco

and One Thousand One Hundred Seventy (1,170)

hectares in Bo. baliwag alsomagallanes in Marigundon,

Cavite should be recovered and declared for and infavor

of the Tallano Estates;

22. A parcel of land containing an area of Thirty Seven

Thousand and Three Hundred Sixty Eight hectares and

Tw o Hundred Tw e n t y Seven square meters

(37,368.0227 hectares) more or less, spuriously under

Lot No. 7718, LRC Cadastral Record No. 1555 and Lo

No. 7719 situated in Barangay Rosario and San Jose,

Mauban, Quezon under Tax Declaration, 17-37-0130 for

a total area of 1,987.3841 hectares; and another

33
 309.4922 hectares also in Sto. Nino, Mauban, Quezon; and another

14,879.4131 hectares, Forest and Private lands with 15 kilometers

shore line along Lamon Bay, Pacific Ocean, the same should be

repossessed for and in favor of the Tallano Estates;

23. Several parcels of lands:

A) Lot 14584-B,under spurious PSd 224470 being a portion

of Lot 14584, Lipa Cad., LRC Cad. Rec. No. 1302 situated

in the Bo. of Talisay, Municipality of Lipa, Batangas

containing an area of 539,111 square meters more or less

evidenced by OCT 0-14-R which was altered but now it

was corrected by virtue of this Order;

B) Lot 14550-B of the Subdivision Plan, LRC PSd-210111

being a portion of Lot 14550 Lipa Cad., LRC Cad. Rec.

No. 1302 situated in Bo. Talisay, Lipa, Batangas containing

an area of 17,417 square meters, evidenced by OCT No.

0070 which was declared null and void;

C) Lot No. 14545 of the Cad. Survey of Lipa, situated in the

Bo. of Talisay, Lipa, Batangas, containing an area of 4,060

square meters, evidenced by OCT 9602 which was declared

null and void;16858 containing an area of Fourteen

Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Four (14,274)

square meteres more or less, the same Decree

and Land Title OCT 844 were declared null and

void ab initio;

34
D) Lot 14767 Cad. Survey of Lipa, Plan-Ap-3276

LRC Case No. L-610 situated in the Bo. of

S a p a c a n d Ta l i s a y, L i p a , B a t a n g a s c o n t a i n i n g

an area of 439,585 square meters, evidenced

by spurious OCT 169-r which was declared

null and void;

E) Lot No. 14571 situated in Bo. Malitlit and Talisay

of Lipa, Batangas containing an area of 1.9572

hectares, and Lot 14767 containing an area of

43.9585 hectares, Barangay Malitlit, Lipa,

Batangas, the same should be recovered in favor

of the Tallano Estates;

F) Lot No. 14578, under spurious Plan-SWO-0548,

Case No. 28, G.L.R.O. Rec. No. 2374 situated in

Bo. Talisay, Lipa, Batangas containing an area of

Twenty Nine (29,829) square meters evidenced

by OCT No. 0-14-R which was altered instead of

OCT 01-4 but it was corrected by virtue of this

Order, the same should be recovered in favor of

the Tallano Estates;

G) Lot No. 14549-B, Plan PSd-64790 being a

portion of Lot 14549, containing an area of

37,105 square meters evidenced by OCT 7535

which was declared null and void, also be

recovered in favor of the Estate owner;

35
H) Lot no. 15522-C situated in Bo. Sapac, Lipa,

Batangas, containing an area of 10,000 square meters

evidenced by OCT 8763 which was declared null and

void, the same should be recovered in favor of the

Tallano clan, the Estate owner;

I) Lot No. 15522-C situated in Bo. Sapac, Lipa,

Batangas containing an area of 10,000 square meters

evidenced by OCT No. 8763 which was declared null

and void;

J) Lot No. 15002 situated in Barangays Sto. Nino and

Talisay, Lipa, Batangas containing an area of 21,193

square meters, evidenced by OCT No. 8868 which

was declared null and void ab initio;

K) Lot no. 15002 containing an area of 42,536 square

meters situated in Bo. Sto. Nino, Talisay, Lipa,

Batangas, evidenced by OCT 9472, which was

declared null and void ab initio

L) Lot No. 6797 containing an area of 50,561

square meters, situated in San Celestino,

Lipa, Batangas, evidenced by spurious OCT

8869/9474 which were declared null and void

ab initio;

M) Lot 14542 containing an area of 6,811 square

meters evidenced by spurious OCT 9601 which

was declared null and void;

36
N) Lot No. 14889-A containing an area of 5,156 square

meters, situated in Sto. Nino, Talisay, Lipa, Batangas

evidenced by spurious OCT 6711 which was declared

null and void ab initio;

O) Lot No. 2772 3,194 square meters

Lot No. 2778 2,151 square meters

Lot No. 2276 1,442 square meters

Lot No. 2773 4,992 square meters

Lot No. 2728-O 27,310 square meters

Lot No. 2732-C 9,040 square meters

Lot No. 2732-A 25,218 square meters

Lot No. 2739-A 22,322 square meters

Lot No. 2735 7,767 square meters

Lot No. 2734 6,347 square meters

Lot No. 2718 97,310 square meters

Lot No. 3412 302 square meters

Lot No. 2730-A 6,274 square meters

Lot No. 2731 33,090 square meters

Lot No. 2738 32,854 square meters

Lot No. 2706 270,053 square meters

situated in Bo. Timbao, BiHan, Laguna evidenced

by spurious OCT 242 which was declared null and

void ab initio, the same said lots should be

repossessed for and in favor of the real owners,

the Tallano clan;

37
2 4 . A Aparcel of land Lot 2 bounded on the Northeast by

Kaymisasa River; on the South by the spurious claim

of Domingo del Mundo; on the West by Dry Creek;

on the North by Lot 1, under spurious PSU 04-

000379, containing and area of 8.8 hectares situated

in Barangay Castanas Bailon (or) Aguinaldo, Cavite

Province, the same should be recovered for the

Tallano Estate;

25. A) A parcel of land situated on the Eastern portion

of Pasig containing an area of approximately 700

hectares bounded on the West by Felix Avenue

and on the North by Marcos Highway, the same

should be recovered for the Tallano Estate;

B) A parcel of land bounded on the North by DoHa

Juliana Subdivision proposed project, and the

proposed Life Home Subdivision, on the East by

Felix Avenue, on the West by the proposed Cruz

A. Robles Subdivision and Buena Mar proposed

subdivision containing an area of 400 hectares,

more or less;

C) A parcel of lands embracing the Barrios of

R o s a r i o , M a y b u n g a , K a n l o g a n , S t o . To m a s ,

S a n A g u s t i n , S a n M i g u e l , St a . C r u z , M a l i n a o ,

S a n J o a q u i n Av e n u e , a l s o e m b r a c i n g t h e r e o n

38
 Bo. Kalawaan Sur and Kalawaan Norte

including Palatiw and Pinagbuhatan, bounded

o n t h e E a s t b y D r. S i x t o A n t o n i o Av e n u e ; o n

the North by O r t i g a s Av e n u e and by

Riverside, Countryside, and De Castro

Homesite Proposed Subdivisions, containing

an area of 2,225 hectares, more or less; all

these lots should be recovered in favor of the

Ta l l a n o E s t a t e ;

D) A p a r c e l o f l a n d b o u n d e d b y O r t i g a s Av e n u e ,

o n t h e We s t b y E . R o d r i g u e z Av e n u e , o n t h e

South by Pasig Boulevard, on the East by Sixto

A n t o n i o Av e n u e e m b r a c i n g t h e a r e a o f U g o n g

Sur containing an area of 700 hectares, more

or less, the same should be recovered for and

i n f a v o r o f t h e Ta l l a n o E s t a t e s .

2 6 . A p a r c e l o f l a n d e m b r a c i n g B a r a n g a y St a . A n a ,

Pateros, bounded on the West by M. Almeda Avenue,

on the South by Bagong Calzada St., on the North by

P a s i g C a d a s t r e , o n t h e E a s t b y Ta g u i g C a d a s t r e

containing an area of 1,850 hectares;

27. A parcel of land embracing the area of

Pinagkawitan, Lipa To w n bounded on the

Southwest by the National Road on the Northwest

39
 by Lot 11322 and Lot 11982, on the North bounded by

Timbungan River, on the Southeast by the Municipality

of Padre Garcia Cadastre containing an area of 1,587,073

sq. meters;

28. A parcel of land embracing the area of Quezon City,

embracing the area of Diliman for a total area of

433.7574 hectares, for the Commonwealth area

embracing an area of 496 hectares, portion of the whole

Quezon City including Novaliches over an area of 16,670

hectares;

29. A parcel of land embracing the area of Antipolo,

Cuinayan, San Mateo, Bosoboso, Antipolo for a total of

2,379 hectares and 422 square meters, Cupang embracing

an area of 121.77 hectares, San Roque and Sitio Don

Enrique (Tallano) in Antipolo over an area of 3,869

hectares; Barangay dela Paz and Hinulugang Taktak

covers an area of 3,774 hectares, Barangays Sto. NiHo

and San Jose embracing an area of 4,892.7 hectares,

Barangay Cugio (Bosoboso), Antipolo embracing an area

of 4,557 hectares;

30. A parcel of land along the on-going construction

of North Expressway embracing the area of

40
 Barangay Lawang Putting Bato within the Meycauayan

C a d a s t r e a n d Va l e n z u e l a C a d a s t r e w i t h e x i s t i n g

14 fruit bearing Mango trees containing an area

of 37.7 hectares;

3 1 . A parcel of land embracing the area of Bagong Barrio

over a 57 hectares and that Bagong Silang in

Caloocan consisting an area of 2,071.7785 hectares,

that barrio in Sampaloc, Tanay, Rizal consisting an

a r e a o f 1 3 1 . 1 5 9 4 h e c t a r e s , a n d t h a t i n Te r e s a a n d

Tanay consisting an area of 15,031.5639 hectares, and

in Hulo San Felipe Neri (Mandaluyong) should be

recovered for and in favor of the heirs of Don Juan

Ejercito consisting an area of 476 hectares situated

in Mandaluyong town and that in Norzagaray

including Barrio Tigbi, Sitio Pamusuan and Barrio

Bayabas consisting an area of 25,095.4432 hectares,

more or less;

32. A parcel of land in Sitio Gagalengin, Sitio Pritil, Sitio

Putting Bato, Tondo, Manila consisting an area of

785.70 hectares; Sitio Tutuban and Barangay Divisoria

consisting an area of 417.61 hectares; Barangay La

Huerta; Barangay Sto. NiHo including Sitio Asinan,

ParaHaque, Greater Manila Area;

41
33. A p a r c e l o f l a n d p o r t i o n o f B a g u i o C i t y e m b r a c i n g

the area of Bo. Navy Base consisting of 700

hectares, Bo. John Hay consisting of 6,970 hectares

should be recovered for Mateo Carino’s 750 hectares

and that Bo. Dontogan, Benguet consisting an area

of 1,331 hectares;

34. A p a r c e l o f l a n d e m b r a c i n g t h e P a d r e G r e g o r i o

Crisostomo Estate situated in Bo. Padre Crisostomo

in Cabanatuan City embracing up to the area of

Mabini up to the Sta. Rosa Cadastre in San

B a r t o l o m e , St a . R o s a , N u e v a E c i j a a l o n g M c A r t h u r

H i g h w a y, i d e n t i f i e d D e c r e e N o . 3 4 7 3 1 2 , C a s e N o .

1 5 1 5 , G. L . R . O . N o . 2 5 6 9 8 , P l a n I I - 11 2 8 8 w h i c h

w a s s p u r i o u s i n n a t u r e , a l s o i n c l u d e d S i t i o B o g n o y,

Barrio Soledad,Municipality of Sta. Rosa which

i n c l u d e s t h e a l l e g e c l a i m o f To m a s N u n e z , M a c a r i a

I g n a c i o , F l o r e n c i o Tu l u s a n a n d A n i c e t o C a t a h a n ,

o n t h e S o u t h i n c l u d e s t h e c l a i m o f A n t o n i o St a .

M a r i a a n d a l s o i n c l u d e s t h e c l a i m o f Vi c t o r i o

Garcia, Adriano dela Cruz, except that of Cipriano

Vi l l a r a m a a n d J u l i a n d e G u z m a n w h i c h w a s

acquired by way of Deed of Absolute Sale from the

o r i g i n a l o w n e r D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o , t h e

h e i r s o f P r i n c e J u l i a n M c L e o d Ta l l a n o Ta g e a n ) ,

42
 the holder of OCT 01-4; that the property of Padre

Gregorio Crisostomo consisting of 3,737.70 hectares

had been a subject of pure lease by original owner to

the lessor, late Padre Gregorio Crisostomo but the

document was falsified by the Department of

Agriculture and the same was altered, decreed,

registered in the name of the Republic of the

Philippines, inspite of the fact that said land was part

of Tallano Estate evidenced by OCT 01-4;

That around 75 hectares along said

McArthur Highway,and another 400 hectares along the

Sapang Bognoy has been reverted in favor of Retired

Major Eduardo Joson, Sr. who acquired said property

from Don Esteban Benitez Tallano in consideration of

his assistance in relocating the subject Estate;

35. A parcel of land containing an area of 1,217 hectares

including the area under unlawful detaineer of Vicente

Adiwang, situated in Barrio Dantogan, Baguio City;

36. A parcel of land containing an area of 192,886 square

meters identified Lot 2, bounded on the South by Upper

Session Road and Session Interchange Circumferential

Road, on the East bounded by Creek and South Drive,

43
 on the North bounded by Lot 3, Section F, on the

N o r t h e a s t b o u n d e d b y Te a c h e r s C a m p , o n t h e

Southwestern portion, is the Government Center

Reservation, and on the North-western is existing

Man Road; situated is Bo. Camp John Hay, Baguio

City, Benguet;

37. A parcel of land containing an area of 173,029 square

meters, situated in Bo. Maly Gulaayang, San Mateo, Rizal

Province, on the East bounded by Man’s Road and

Montalban Cadastre, and on the Northwestern portion

bounded by San Mateo Cadastre, and on the Western

portion bounded by San Mateo Cadastre and on the South

also by San Mateo Cadastre;

38. A parcel of land consisting of around 750 hectares

in Barrio Casili, Cabuyao, Laguna should be taken

over for and in favor of the Tallano Clan in Honor of

his cousin, late Pedro Benitez Casile, the lessee of

the Colegio de San Juan in behalf of Don Esteban

Benitez Tallano;

39. A parcel of land containing an area of 176,531 square

meters situated in Barangay San Jose, San Mateo, Province

of Rizal, bounded on the East is a property squatted by

44
 Fl a v i a n o N i c o l a s E m e t e r i o p o r t i o n o f t h e E s t a t e , o n

the South bounded by an area squatted by C. Cru,

F. S a n t o s a n d G. C r u z a l s o p o r t i o n o f t h e E s t a t e ,

o n t h e We s t b o u n d e d b y a n a r e a s q u a t t e d b y

L . Orena,Gregorio Santos and Santos C. Ocampo

portion of the Estate;

40. A parcel of land identified Lot 1, 2 and 3, Parcel

1, portion of PSU 2031, on the North bounded by

l o t p o r t i o n o f P a r c e l 1 P S U 2 0 3 1 , o n t h e We s t b y

portion of Parcel 1 PSU 2031, on the South portion

of Parcel 1 PSU 2031 on the East bounded by

I m e l d a Av e n u a ( o l d n a m e – S u c a t - P a r a n a q u e R o a d ) ,

situated in Sitio Pildira 3, Ibayo, Paranaque

containing an area of 93,863 square meters;

4 1 . A p a r c e l o f l a n d ( L o t 4 , Ts - 3 9 = L o t 2 9 o f R e s . S e c .

“ L ” o f B a g u i o To w n s i t e , p l a n S w o - 3 2 0 7 6 , C i v i l

R e s e r v a t i o n R e c o r d n o . 2 11 ) , s i t u a t e d i n t h e R e s .

Sec. “L,” City of Baguio containing an area of

41,837 square meters, more or less;

42. A p a r c e l o f l a n d s i t u a t e d a l o n g t h e N i n o y

A q u i n o H i g h w a y ( f o r m e r l y Ta g a y t a y - L a u r e l

Road) on the Southwest as the City Hall and

45
 t h e p r o p o s e d P N P H e a d q u a r t e r o f Ta g a y t a y C i t y a t

the stretch length of 4,000 meters from the corner

of Laurel Cadastre, and at the stretch width of

5,000 meters, containing an area of 2,000 hectares,

more or less;

43. A parcel of land situated in the area of Mabiga

Hacienda, Clark Air Force Base embracing Sapang

Bato, Angeles City, Balibago, Angeles City, Mabiga,

Sta. Ines, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga traversing

s o u t h t o C r e w Va l l e y w i t h a s t r e t c h l e n g t h o f 1 5 , 2 0 0

m e t e r s f r o m We s t t o N o r t h f r o m Z a m b a l e s C a d a s t r e

u p t o B a m b a n , Ta r l a c C a d a s t r e a n d a t t h e s t r e t c h

width of 53,000 meters from East to South

originated from Bamban Cadastre to San Jose

C a d a s t r e o f Ta r l a c c o n t a i n i n g a n a r e a o f 8 0 , 5 6 0

hectares, more or less;

44. A parcel of land consisting of 20,000 square meters

situated along EDSA facing last corner of Harrison

St. should be recovered and be turned over to Mayor

Pablo Cuneta or his heirs who paid said lot partially

f r o m D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o o n t h e y e a r 1 9 6 0

amounting to P500,000.00, the balance of

P3,500,000.00 should be paid upon possession.

46
45. That an area of 35,000 square meters, more or less,

along Bonifacio St. and David St. in Pasay City should

be recovered and be turned over to the intervenor,

Mr. Julian M. Tallano.

THEREFORE, in view of the failure of the

Republic of the Philippines to conform substantially to the

prescribed Rules on THE MOTION FOR RELIEF/

RECONSIDERATION in the case at bar has been

DISMISSED WITH COST AGAINST THE REPUBLIC OF

THE PHILIPPINES AND ALL PARTIES CONCERNED IM

SO FAR AS THE CASE BECAME FINAL, EXECUTORY

AND IT HAD BEEN EXECUTED for so many times and it

was TERMINATED AND HAD BEEN RESTED IN PEACE

FOR SO LONG AGO. While Motion for the Third Issuance

of Alias Writ of Execution, Possession and Demolition and

Execution for the Issuance of reconstituted copies of the

duplicate and its originals of OCT No. T-01-4, TCT No.

T-408 and TCT No. T-498 of the concern Honorable

Register of Deeds that has jurisdiction over the land area

where the land is located has been granted, commanding the

Clerk of Court, Atty. Jose E. Ortiz, to act as Sheriff of this

Branch, and Deputized Atty. Epitacio Sobejana as PRIVATE

SHERIFF to execute both February 4, 1972 Judgment with

Compromise Agreement, that March 21, 1974 and that

47
Clarificatory Decision of January 19, 1976 which

were partially executed by recent WRIT OF

EXECUTION and that SECOND ALIAS WRIT OF

E X E C U T I O N . A n d e n f o r c e f o r t h e i s s u a n c e o f Ti t l e s ,

recover, repossess all subject land areas covered by

l o s t b u t r e c o n s t i t u t e d T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 , T C T N o . T- 4 9 8

a n d l a n d c o v e r e d b y O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4 i n a c c o r d a n c e

with March 21, 1974, January 19, 1976 and that of

February 4, 1972. Judgment with Compromise

Agreement throughout the country and the same

should be turned over to the owner provided said

execution will not defeat the interest of the

government, both national and local, over the land

actually occupied by its structures and buildings

particularly by Land Reform Program, except those

open spaces, farm or residential lots which are found

w i t h i n v a l i d L a n d Ti t l e s ;

That all lands occupied by the national or

local government, whether forest, agriculture or not

that would be intended for conversion from its

original purpose and eventually for sale defeating the

intended beneficiaries, the same should be recovered,

and be turned over to the land owners/intervenors for

the sake of the Filipino farmers.

48
 F u r t h e r l y, t o a u g m e n t y o u r f u n c t i o n i n

a c c o r d a n c e t o l a w, e ff e c t i v e l y, y o u a n d y o u r d e p u t i z e d

P r i v a t e S h e r i ff , P N P, N B I p e r s o n n e l a n d o r m e m b e r s o f

the Philippine Army are hereby empowered to arrest and

i m p r i s o n a n y p e r s o n e i t h e r c i v i l i a n o r o f f i c i a l c a p a c i t y,

f r o m t h e g o v e r n m e n t o r a n y p r i v a t e o ff i c e i n c l u d i n g t h a t

Barangay officials who are found in the direct or

indirect unlawful detainers and or selling rights over

the land and or becomes an obstruction of justice.

Furthermore, this Honorable Court

maintained its Judgment with Compromise Agreement

on February 4, 1972, Clarificatory Order dated March

21, 1974, and Clarificatory Decision on January 19,

1976 that correction of which was merely the land areas

from exhorbitant into a correct area of 125,326.37

h e c t a r e s e v i d e n c e d b y T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d t h a t 2 7 1 , 2 7 6

h e c t a r e s f o r t h e T C T N o . T- 4 9 8 , a n d r e m a i n e d

sustainable with all the rights and interest in favor of

t h e I n t e r v e n o r s , M r. J U L I A N M . TA L L A N O a n d D O N

A N N A C L E TO M A D R I G A L A C O P a n d n o t t o A c o p i a d o s

that appears in November 4, 1975 Clarificatory Order

which was unenforceable after five (5) years of no

execution which said period had been lapse in toto. And

as clearly embroiled in a Judgment withCompromise

49
Agreement of February 4, 1972, Clarificatory Order

of March 21, 1974 and January 19, 1976 which

r e m a i n e f f e c t i v e a n d , l i k e w i s e , e n f o r c e a b l e f o r e v e r,

while it were executed judicially but also embroiled

by the agreements and stipulation set forth in a

Judgment with Compromise Agreement dated

February 4, 1972 that prescription to execute the

same and for the issuance of the reconstituted copies

o f t h a t O C T N o . T- 0 1 - 4 , T C T N o . T- 4 0 8 a n d T C T N o .

T- 4 9 8 t o g e t h e r w i t h i t s l o s t c o p y o f o w n e r s a n d

duplicate copies of the originals for and in favor of

t h e l a t e P r i n c e E s t e b a n B e n i t e z Ta l l a n o a n d l a t e D o n

Gregorio Madrigal Acop which should be reckoned

from the January 1, 1999 from which said five (5)

years prescription of execution over said judgment

should take effect immediately upon payment of the

Republic of the Philippines for its damage liability

of P2 Billion pesos together with its 7% per annum

interest which was commenced in the year 1968

e n d i n g D e c e m b e r 3 1 , 1 9 9 8 t o t h e Ta l l a n o s . T h i s i s

t o c o v e r t h e r e q u i r e d R e a l t y Ta x e s d u e t o t h e

government both local and national in as much as

p a y m e n t o f R e a l t y Ta x e s s u b s t a n t i a l l y e s s e n t i a l w h i l e

the aforementioned Land Titles are indispensable

thereon in their issuance thereof.

50
 That land areas covered by OCT No. T-01-4 embrac-

ing the whole archipelago, including the Sabah Islands, Turtle

Islands and Kalayaan Islands embracing a total of 7, 134 Is-

lands with an area of 1,049,212.962 square nautical miles

should be determined by actual relocation based on its techni-

cal description available as submitted by the Geodetic Engi-

neer in cooperation of those in the Bureau of Lands, it’s the

land should be based from the original landmark in Binondo

Church in Intramuros, City of Manila;

And that Islands of Kalayaan, Turtle Islands and

Sabah should be recovered by way of this Third Writ of Ex-

ecution, Possession and Demolition and all structures thereon

which do not belong to the Republic should be cleared and

demolished and the Intervenor should cooperate with the gov-

ernment to file for said repossession thru the International

Court of Justice.

You are as well empowered to clear, demolish or

remove any form of structures that will be found in the sub-

ject land area.

That you are also commanded to require

and impose order to concern Honorable Register

of Deeds and his/her implementing staffs of the

51
Province and City where the lands are located to issue the

reconstituted copy of the duplicate and copy of its original

of OCT No. T-01-4, of the Hon. Register of Deeds of the

City of Manila, TCT No. T-408 of the Hon. Register of

Deeds of the Province of Bulacan in Malolos and TCT No.

T-408 of the Honorable Register of Deeds of the Province

of Rizal in Pasig without, in as much as the Rules of Court

over the five years reglamentory period to execute the

Decision with Compromise Agreement of February 4,

1972, Clarificatory Order of March 21, 1974, and that

Clarificatory Order of January 19, 1976 cannot be enforced

and it was barred by statute of limitations and

imprescriptible beyond the terms and conditions embodied

in the said Decision with Compromise Agreement between

the Republic of the Philippines and the Intervenors, Mr.

Julian M. Tallano and Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop. That

five years prescription period to execute the said Decision

and Order in favor of the movant should reckon from the

time the National Government has fully paid the required

fifty (50) percent of its obligation in the form of damages

to the movants, which will take effect only after thirty

years from the year 1968, considering that payment of

Realty Taxes of the subject land in indispensable upon

theissuance of the reconstituted copy of the duplicate and

the original of subject Land Titles.

52
 Furthermore, the movant has as much

satisfactorily complied, and had met the elements

required by the laws in order to reconstitute the subject

L a n d Ti t l e s , a s i t w e r e c i t e d i n a c a s e o f C h i n e s e

Nationalist Party vs. Bermudo, Court of Appeals,

CA-44100-R of December 1, 1972; like as follows:

1. T h a t t h e C e r t i f i c a t e o f L a n d Ti t l e h a s b e e n

lost and destroyed

2. That the petitioner is the registered owner

or has an Interest therein

3. T h a t t h e C e r t i f i c a t e o f L a n d Ti t l e w a s i n

force a the time it was lost or destroyed

4. That the Petition for Reconstitution has

been fully complied by the movant in

accordance with Republic Act No. 26

approved on September 25, 1926,

requiring a Judicial Reconstitution, as

g o v e r n e d b y P. D . 1 5 2 9 w h i c h t o o k e f f e c t

o n J u n e 11 , 1 9 7 8 .

C l e a r l y, i f t h e C o u r t o f J u s t i c e a d h e r e s t o

the norm of jurisprudence in order to vindicate for

justice, the land owners, victimsof land anomalies

and clandestine land grabbing, the same should

53
 let them lawfully enjoy their constitutional rights

and the force of the law should be applied now in

favor of the victims of unjust Compromise Agreement

of February 4, 1972, Clarificatory Order of March

21, 1974, and that Clarificatory Order of January 19,

1976 that contradicts the Rules set forth in a LRA

circular No. 3 of December 6, 1968 of the Land

Registration Commission.

Ordering the Secretary of the DENR

a n d t h e D i r e c t o r s o f i t s i m p l e m e n t i n g a g e n c y,

the Office of the Land Management Bureau

from Region 1 to 13 to reconstitute all

pertinent documents, records, data and survey

plans of the subject lands for and in the name

of the land owner/Intervenors, Mr. Julian

M . Ta l l a n o , l a t e D o n E s t e b a n B e n i t e z , l a t e

P r i n c e J u l i a n M a c l e o d Ta l l a n o , l a t e P r i n c e

Lacan Acuna Ta g e a n , late Don Gregorio

Madrigal Acop and late Don Annacleto

Madrigal Acop, provided it will not hamper the

land reform of the National Government, that

the priority of which, is to preserve the

i n t e r e s t o f a l l f a r m e r s / t e n a n t s o f t h e c o u n t r y.

54
 Furthermore, therefore, let the following Orders

should be complied and be implemented, as follows:

1. Ordering the Honorable Register of Deeds of the City of

Manila to issue the Reconstituted duplicate and original

copy of Land Title OCT No. T-01-4 and in favor of the

l a t e P r i n c e L a c a n Ta g e a n ( Ta l l a n o ) , P r i n c e J u l i a n

Macleod-Tallano, Don Esteban Benitez Tallano or to

their immediate successor in interest, Mr. Julian M.

Tallano, a Judicial Administrator of the Estate

2. Ordering the Honorable Register of Deeds of the

Province of Rizal to issue the Reconstituted duplicate

and original copies of TCT No. T-408 to and in favor

of the late Don Gregorio Madrigal Acop or to his

i m m e d i a t e s u c c e s s o r i n i n t e r e s t , M r. J u l i a n

M.Tallano, a Judicial Administrator of the Estate

3. Ordering the Honorable Register of Deeds of the

Province of Bulacan to issue the Reconstituted

duplicate and original copies of TCT No. T-498 to

and in the name of Don Esteban Benitez Tallano or

to his immediatesuccessor in interest, Mr. Julian M.

Tallano, a Judicial Administrator of the Estate.

55
 Otherwise, defiance thereof, said Honorable

Register of Deeds, his/her implementing staffs should

be charged for obstruction of justice and that

corresponding penalties should be imposed against the

violating party or parties.

L e t t h i s A l i a s Wr i t o f E x e c u t i o n , P o s s e s s i o n

a n d D e m o l i t i o n b e e x e c u t e d a c c o r d i n g l y w i t h o u t d e l a y,

and the parties should be observe the policy of secrecy

as enforced by the National Intelligence Coordinating

Agency of the Government for National Interest

embracing Sovereign Issue.

SO ORDERED.

P a s a y C i t y, M a y 2 8 , 1 9 8 9

( S G D ) S O F R O N I O G. S AY O
Judge

SAS/JEO

Copy furnished:
O ff i c e o f t h e H o n . S o l i c i t o r G e n e r a l
Salcedo St., Makati
Metro Manila

56
57