Mangahas vs CA Ruling:

Facts: NO.

April 1955- Sps. Rodil occupied and possessed the
subject property.
February 1, 1971- Sps. Rodil sold the land to Sps. Cayme
for P7,000. On the same day, Sps. Cayme applied for Free
Patent which was eventually approved by the Bureau of
Lands. So, ROD issued an OCT in their favor.
Before the sale in 1971, Servando Mangahas (Mangahas
for brevity) had been in possession thereof by virtue of
the agreement between Mangahas and Sps. Rodil
allowing Mangahas to occupy and cultivate the said
parcel of land.
Even after the sale, Mangahas was permitted by Sps.
Cayme to continue possessing and working on the same
land upon the request of Sps. Cayme themselves because
they were then busy.
Sps. Cayme tolerated Mangahas possession until
February 5, 1985, when they commenced the present
action for recovery of possession and the possession of
real property.
Sps. Cayme demanded from Mangahas the return of the
land but Mangahas refused to vacate the place.
As to ACQUISITIVE PRESCRIPTION
The possession of Sps. Rodil, from whom he traces the
origin of his supposed title, commenced only in April
1955. The complaint was filed on February 25, 1985.
Hence, the requirement of at least 30 years continuous
possession has not been complied with even if we were
to tack Rodils period of possession.
As to POSSESSION (in re 525 and 540).
Furthermore, the possession of Mangahas here is not in
the concept of an owner, therefore, it could not ripen
into acquisitive prescription.
The requisites for acquiring dominion are the ff:
1. Possession must be actual or constructive.
2. It must be in the concept of an owner.
While it may be true that Mangahas was in actual
possession of the property, he was not holding it in the
concept of an owner. He was in possession of the
property by mere tolerance.

It is the contention of Mangahas that he entered into the

possession of the land under controversy sometime in
1969 with the Sps. Rodil, and since then, he has been in
continuous occupation and possession in concepto de
dueo up to the present, enjoying the fruits thereof to the
exclusion of all others, his right thereto being evidenced
by the Kasulatan ng Pagtangap ng Salapi dated
December 7, 1969.

He further theorizes that with the length of possession of

his predecessors-in-interest, the Sps Rodil, tacked to his
own possession, the total period of possession in his
favor would suffice to vest in him the ownership of the
property under the law on prescription.

ISSUE:

1. WON Mangahas has acquired the property

through ACQUISITIVE PRESCRIPTION.
2. WON Mangahas held it in the concept of an
owner.