• Section 28. Partial judgment. In a case where only a
portion of the land subject of registration is contested, the court may render partial judgment provided that a subdivision plan showing the contested and uncontested portions approved by the Director of Lands is previously submitted to said court.
• Section 29. Judgment confirming title. All conflicting
claims of ownership and interest in the land subject of the application shall be determined by the court. If the court, after considering the evidence and the reports of the Commissioner of Land Registration and the Director of Lands, finds that the applicant or the oppositor has sufficient title proper for registration, judgment shall be rendered confirming the title of the applicant, or the oppositor, to the land or portions thereof. • The distinction between the general and limited jurisdiction of the registration court has been eliminated.
• All conflicting claims of ownership and interest in
the land, and related issues, submitted to the court with or without the unanimity of the parties, may now be heard and resolved by the court.
• The court is now authorized to hear and decide not
only non-controversial cases but even contentious issues which used to be beyond competence. • Section 29 mandates the LRA Administrator and the Director of Lands to submit to the court all necessary and relevant evidence as well as reports to aid the court in the determination of the case.
• The court may also require the DENR and the LRA to submit a report on whether the subject property has already been registered and covered by certificates if title.
• The duty of the aforesaid officials to render reports
is not limited to the period before the court’s decision become final, but may extend even after its finality but not beyond the lapse of one year from the entry of the decree. • The notice of appearance makes it clear that “only notices of orders, resolutions, and decisions served on the Solicitor General will bind the party represented.”
• The period to perfect an appeal shall be counted from the
date when the Solicitor General received a copy of the decision because the service of the decision upon the city fiscal did not operate as a service upon the Solicitor General.
• The belated filing of an appeal by the State, or even its
failure to file an opposition, in a land registration case because of the mistake or error on the part of its officials or agents does not deprive the government of its right to appeal from a judgment of the court. Principle of Res judicata
• Res Judicata
- Where a judgment on the merits rendered in a
former case is final and executory, and was rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction, and that case and the present case involves the same parties, the same parcels of land and a similarity of causes of action, the present action is barred by a prior judgment. Requisites of Res Judicata 1. The former judgment must be final;
2. It must have been rendered by a court having
jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties;
3. It must be a judgment on the merits;
4. There must be between the first and second actions,
a. Identity of parties b. Identity of subject matter c. Identity of cause of action • A final judgment in an ordinary civil case determining the ownership of a piece of land is a res judicata in a registration proceeding where the parties and the property are the same as in a former case.
• But a judgment dismissing an application for
registration of land does not constitutes res judicata, and the unsuccessful applicant or any person deriving title from him, may file another proceeding for the registration of the same land. Valisno vs. Plan GR. No. L-55152 August 19, 1986 J. Fernan