Decision
3
G.R. No. 201273
Heirs of Mateo Carifio opposed the petition, and prayed for its dismissal,
cancellation and revocation.
After due proceedings, the NCIP issued Resolution No. 060-2009, viz.:
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this
Commission hereby declares and certifies that the parcels of
land described herein is an ancestral land belonging to the
Heirs of Ikang Pau[ s]. Let the two (2) Certificates of
Ancestral Land Title (CALT) bearing CALT No. CARTUB-0309-000208 located at Barangay Poblacion,
Municipality of Tuba, Province of Benguet be issued in the
name of the Heirs of Ikang Paus as indicated in plan SWO141102155703-D-A-NCIP.
The protest filed by the Heirs of Mateo Carifio,
represented by Jacqueline Carifio and Judith Carino is
hereby dismissed for lack of merit.
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Quezon City, March 19, 2009.
Consequently, Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. 0-CALT-37 5
covering [a] 623,108[-]square meter lot in Baguio City, was issued in the
name of private respondents on April 24, 2009.
The Heirs of Mateo Carifio filed a motion for reconsideration, but
the N:CIP denied it in its Resolution No. 099 dated September 24, 2009.
, However, on June 10, 2010, the Republic, through the OSG,
questioned OCT No. 0-CALT-37 in the name of private respondents, and
filed a suit for Reversion, Annulment of Documents and Cancellation of
Title with Prayer for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order (FRO) and
Writ of Preliminary Injunction. It pointed out several irregularities in the
issuance of the CAL T in favor of private respondents. x x x
xxxx
Private respondents answered the complaint denying all its material
allegations. x x x As special and affirmative defenses, they averred lack of
jurisdiction and lack of cause of action. They pointed out that the complaint
assailed the CALT and the OCT issued on the basis of the CALT, which
under the Indigenous [Peoples] Right[s] Act (IPRA), falls within the
jurisdiction of the NCIP, and not of the regular courts. They asserted that
the RTC has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint; hence,
the complaint must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. x x x
On July 14, 2010, the RTC issued an Order directing the Republic to
show cause why the complaint should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
In its Compliance, the Republic asserted that the RTC had
jurisdiction over the complaint. Citing Chapter II of Batas Pambansa (B.P.)
Blg. 129, it maintained that the RTC had jurisdiction over all civil actions
which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest
Appearing as OCT No. O-CALT-37 in some parts of the records.