Doctrine
Tax declarations are insufficient proof of ownership. A tax declaration does not prove ownership, but merely serves as an indicium of possession in the concept of ownership. A tax receipt or a declaration of ownership for taxation purposes does not constitute evidence of ownership or of the right to possess realty when not supported by other effective proofs.
Facts
Buenaventura Ebancuel (Buenaventura) was the registered owner of a two-hectare parcel of land located in Barangay Baloganon, Masinloc, Zambales, covered by Certificate of Title No. 97. The subject property was declared for taxation in Buenaventura’s name.
In 1948, Buenaventura died, leaving his son Wenceslao orphaned. As an orphan and living far from Masinloc, he was unaware of the property left behind by his father. Sometime in 1974, he searched for existing properties in his father’s name with the Registry of Deeds of Zambales and discovered the subject property. After which, Wenceslao paid the inheritance tax and the real property taxes, including all arrears.
Subsequently, in 1981, Wenceslao visited the subject property and was surprised to discover the respondents Romulo Acierto, et. al., occupying the same. Dismayed, he filed a complaint with the Barangay. Unfortunately, they failed to reach an amicable settlement.
On December 1, 1997, Wenceslao filed the instant complaint for accion publiciana.
In their Answer, respondents countered that they purchased the subject property from Buenaventura themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest between the years 1940 and 1945. Likewise, they stated that they have been in possession of the subject property for more than 30 years. Respondents insist that the sale is supported by public records such as tax declarations, which bear the annotation, “Bought from Ebancuel.” They urge that said tax declarations are admissible as secondary evidence of the sale, and their genuineness and due execution may be proven under the doctrine of “ancient documents.”
ISSUE: Whether or not tax declarations may be considered as proof of ownership in lieu of a registered title.
Ruling
NO. The respondents’ tax declarations are insufficient proof of ownership. A tax declaration does not prove ownership, but rather serves as an indicium of possession in the concept of ownership. A tax receipt or a declaration of ownership for taxation purposes does not constitute evidence of ownership or of the right to possess realty when not supported by other effective proofs.
Respondents may not harp on their possession of the subject property regardless of the length thereof. Their occupation, even in good faith, will not ripen into ownership. It is settled that no title to registered land in derogation of that of the registered owner shall be acquired by prescription or adverse possession. Since Buenaventura, followed by Wenceslao, and presently, the petitioners hold a Torrens title over the subject property, their rights may not be stolen through the respondents’ occupation.
Civil cases are decided based on a preponderance of evidence. In this case, Wenceslao and the petitioners presented the following documents as proof of their ownership: (i) Certified True Copy of OCT No. 97; (ii) Certified True Copy of TCT No. T-20033; (iii) Tax Declarations; (iv) Location Plan; and (v) Survey Plan. In contrast, all that respondents presented were a few deeds of sale and tax declarations that did not coincide with the description of the disputed property. Clearly, Wenceslao’s evidence prevails over that of the respondents. Accordingly, respondents, having no title or document to overcome the petitioners’ ownership, are intruders who have no possessory rights over the land. Certainly, their acts cannot affect petitioners’ ownership.