The Power of Truth vs. the en Banc Decision of the Supreme Court

8/3/2019 The Power of Truth vs. the en Banc Decision of the Supreme Court

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-power-of-truth-vs-the-en-banc-decision-of-the-supreme-court 1/7

Don Mariano E. San PedroFoundation, Inc.

Sharing a legacy dedicated to Philippine progress

and world understanding.

LEGAL BRIEF (THE POWER OFTRUTH)

IN CLARIFICATION OF THE ‘EN BANC’ DECISION OF THE

HON. SUPREME COURT IN THE FINAL SAN PEDRO CASES

[G.R. Nos.103727 & 106496]

RE: TITULO DE PROPRIEDAD NO.4136

[ON THE PERFECTION OF TITULO PROP.4136 OF APRIL 25, 1894, ASINDEFEASIBLE & IMPRESCRIPTIBLETITLE, THAT CAN NEITHER BEANNULLED OR VOIDED, NOR SUBJECTED

TO PRESCRIPTION OR LACHES,---I.E., IPSOFACTO, BY OPE-RATION OF THE LAW, & BYVIRTUE OF THE DISCOVERY OF 1971 &1972 ORIG. CERTS. OF TITLE (OCTs)NOS. 0-5617 & 0-5797, UNDER LANDREG. CASES N-1861 & N-1876---ANDNECESSARILY, IN THE LIGHT OF ‘EN BANC’DECISION OF HON. SUPREME COURT ON

THE FF. CONSOLIDATED CASES: “ESTATEOF LATE DON MARIANO SAN PEDRO VS.C.A.”, WITH “PEDRO IGNACIO, ALIASENGRACIO SAN PEDRO, ET AL VS. C.A.

& R.P.” G.R.103727 & 106496, DEC.18,1996]

[NOTE: The official (1) “Legal Brief for Titulo Prop. 4136”, together with (2) Gen. Memo. toGen. Phil. Public and the Intl. Community, (as itis perpetually bound by Treaty of Paris of 1898),including (3) 4 Affidavits of Adjudication , allappended to (4) Holograohic Will of DonAlejandro San Pedro, with (5) Court Order of Probate attached, had all been submitted to allconcerned Reg. of Deeds where San PedroEstate lays, per Sect. 13, Rule 76, Rules of Court, & Sect. 113 of Prop. Reg. Dec. (PD 1529);w/ copies furnished to:

[Hon. President of the Philippines Natl.Bureau of Investn. (NBI)

Hon. Supreme Court of the Repub. PhilippinesNatl.Police (PNP)

Hon. Congress of the Philippines ArmedForces of the Phils. (AFP)…incldng. DENR, BLM, NAMRIA, DOJ, LRA &

Registry of Deeds]

[email protected] Tel.839-701409207355333

LEGAL BRIEF ON TITULO PROP. 4136, P.2

PREFATORY :

1. The operative and most authoritativeSupreme Court case in the question of validityof the Titulo de Propriedad No. 4136 is the“Estate of Late Don Mariano San Pedro y

Esteban vs. Court of Appeals”, and“Pedro Ignacio, alias Engracio San Pedro,et al vs. Court of Appeals & Rep. of thePhilippines,” G.R. Nos.103727 & 106496,Dec.18, 1996.

2. The said cases (G.R. Nos.1037106496) were decided upon by Hon. SuCourt sitting en banc. And the decision oSupreme Court on the said consogermane cases was unanimous. This wlongest running case in Phil. juriscovering many decades, & spanninincumbencies of Supreme Court Justicdecide. The decision is final, & arrived atumpteenth ‘motions for reconsideraof the parties.

3. All

previous San Pedro cases were cons The Decision was made in full-length; &rarest instance that Hon. Supreme presented (in full blown graphics) mcontroversial estate —i.e., to emphasize tland coverage of Titulo Prop. 4136.

4. What we have here is an enlightened Supreme Court; a legislatively interSupreme Court; a Supreme Court tforward looking, that refused to be paral

held hostage to societal evils lurking “reign of greed” & “social cancer” now gour land. Hon. Supreme Court is intuexpect-ant of this time of crisis to compeople (thru Liga Filipina) shall call for cand will need a peaceful instrument to act

5. Because of this, La Liga Filipina shall nit difficult to pursue its enlightened agemoral reform and peaceful social revoluthe Philippines. The Titulo Prop. 4perfectly valid, and its vast lands are reto support and finance the nationalist st

of La Liga Filipina to fight injus-tice, pocorruption, ignorance & superstition Phils.

6. Thus, the Hon. Supreme Court in thesaid vital case confirmed and made it clethe huge area of the vast lands und



controversial Titulo Prop. 4136 is 173,000hectares.

7. Hon. Supreme Court always emphasized thehuge extent of the lands of San Pedro estate. The Hon.Court said “The heirs of late MarianoSan Pedro laid claim and have been layingclaim to the ownership of, against third personsand Government itself, a total land area of approx. 173,000 has. or “214,047 quiniones,”


7. The Hon. Supreme Court is not, here,maligning the true and legal ‘San Pedro heirs’;it in fact is impressing to the world the SanPedros’ most legal manner of claiming andowning the land, and it is by ‘notorius’ andadverse claim and occupation of the landagainst the whole world, even as the Hon.Supreme Court, in effect, herein committeditself to acknowledge this fact, neces-sarily, bythe power of its “judicial notice” (on the legal‘notorius’ claim of the San Pedros’ of the vast

lands of Titulo Prop. 4136).

8. The operative law (Spanish Royal Decree)that granted land ownership at that time (April25, 1894) was the Maura Law. This adjusts theland-grant of a latifundio w/ smaller area (4,700has.), with a second larger land-grant of anencomienda (173,000 has. in the case of theSan Pedro estate & its Titulo Prop. 4136).

9. The 2nd completion grant to Don Mariano SanPedro, allowed under Maura Law, for theencomienda of 173,000 has., was perfected under

mortgage transactions (thru Spanish MortgageLaw) between Don Mariano and his friend DonIgnacio Conrado (Supremo of Rizal followers,Rizalistas, who would have accompanied Dr.Rizal in his proposed Philippine colonization of North Borneo). ( TP 4136 is now the only hope of La Liga Filipina to pursue its agenda of national

renaissance, of economic nationalism & nationalindustrialization.)

10. Thus there is no longer any problem at allas to the identity of the Titulo Prop. 4136 (beingexamined). There is no laches, because the Hon.Supreme Court, no less, in its en banc Decision,acknow-ledges the ‘notorious’ prosecution of the ownership interest of the estate of DonMariano E. San Pedro by the claimant-heirs.

11. The matter of NBI Questioned DocumentReport is resolved by the presentation of theoriginal NBI Questioned Document Report of NBIExpert Arturo Rotor in November 1968, right inthe Land Reg. Cases N-1861 & N-1876, underPresiding Judge Emmanuel Munoz who examinedthe Spanish Title valid, so that he caused theissuance of Torrens Title to the San Pedroestate. The orig. NBI Questioned Doc. Report of Agent Rotor was the more valid basis of LandReg. Court, under Judge Munoz, to approve TP4136.

12. Insinuations then current that landgrabbingcontractor-deve-lopers, together with Ortigas’s,have contributed to a billion peso fund stashedin several attaché cases to bribe the Hon.Supreme Court Justices, while being plausible, isdefinitively belied and dis-proved bystatesmanlike decision of Hon. Supreme Court infavor of the poor and the masses by causing therevalidation of TP 4136.


17. Look at how easily the judgments of Hon.

Supreme Court, sitting en banc in 1996 to finallydispose of San Pedro’s “most fantastic landcase”, can get to allow the salutary principle of ‘stare decisis’ and the values of equity and justice to overcome them, specially upondiscovery of OCTs nos. 0-5617 & 0-5797 for TP4136.

18. The “1st judgment“ is mooacademic. The validity of the TP 4136 is a‘res judicata’. This came about upon disof OCTs 0-5617 & 0-5797, under LR Cases & N-1876, which resulted in full compliance4136 with requirements of PD 892, and validity as Spanish Title. Thereforreestablished La Liga Filipina & the SanFoundation, both institutions being affecte

public interests, have all the right to ut4136 in their struggle to: 1) redeem the oppressed, 2) upgrade human settlemeestablish food security, 4) pursue ecnationalism & national industrialization, 5) the environment, 6) fight injustice, pignorance, superstition & corruption government , as bidded in the HolographicDon Alejandro.

19. The “2nd judgment”, in ligrevalidation of TP 4136, runs counter to

of “estate of deceased”. Before its

‘execution’ in a Will or termination “administration”, it partakes of dynamic chaenabling it to grow by sound mngt., or a wmay come from nowhere to enrich it modue to bad mngt., the estate is dissipatedthere’s showing of fraud or bad faitadministrator, trustee or tenant, voluntary he alone becomes responsible; & like in agas implied trustee, his gains in using theand body of estate redound not to him but to estate.

20. The “3rd judgment” has also now b

academic, because we already have oindependent Special Proceedings case inRTC, which is exclusive to Don AlejandPedro’s Holo-graphic Will (with the Court’of Probate).



21. The “4th judgment” refers to false heirs &fraudulent claimants of San Pedro estate. Theycan easily drop TP 4136 if it is be-coming hot forthem to make their dirty money, and still exploitthe estate by using other claptrap. But DonAlejandro, judicially confirmed true legal heir,had been painstakingly made different from allthe rest of “heirs” by Judge Ofilada by declaringhim alone as next of kin of Don Mariano. DonAlejandro was principled man, he would standfor integrity of TP 4136 & pursue family’s traditionof sacrifice & altruism, & would always abide bythe estate’s duty to contribute to Phil. progress,social justice & international understanding.


FACTS OF THE CASE:

1. The Hon. Supreme Court in its 1996Decision en banc (on San Pedro estate)has confirmed and made it clear the hugearea of vast lands under controversialTitulo Prop. 4136 is 173,000 has. (Pls. see

decision in GR103727, Dec. 1996, with sketch planof Titulo Prop. 4136.) It also made clear the twoconfusing dates (April 25, 1894 & April 29, 1894)involved in San Pedro controversy, and forpurposes of its 1996 en banc Decision, Hon.Supreme Court affirmed “April 25, 1894” as thecorrect & principal date, and (due to fact thatpetitioners-heirs, who are false heirs-claimants,“weren’t able to pre-sent original of Titulo Prop.4136 nor genuine copy thereof”), Hon. SupremeCourt thus made a grave declaration on TituloProp. 4136.

2. The Hon. Supreme Court further clarified:“The heirs of the late Mariano San Pedro yEsteban laid claim & have been laying claimto ownership of, against 3rd persons andgovt. itself, a total land area of approx.173,000 has. or “214,047 quiniones,” based

on Spanish title, entitled “Titulo de Prop. 4136” of April 25, 1894. The claim, according to San Pedroheirs, appears to cover lands in provinces of Nueva Ecija, Bul., Rizal, Laguna & Quezon; andsuch Metro Manila cities as Quezon, Caloocan,Pasay, Taguig, Pasig and Manila, thus affecting ingeneral lands extending from Mal., Bul. to CityHall of Quezon and land area between DingalanBay in the north and Tayabas Bay in the south.”

3. Hon. Supreme Court also made clear: “…The heirs or suc-cessors-in-interest of Don Mariano San Pedro are not withoutrecourse. P.D. 892, xx, grants all holdersof Spanish Titles the right to apply forregistration of their lands under Act 496,or Land Reg. Act, within 6 months fromeffectivity of the Decree.” Xxx The Hon.Supreme Court believed and said: “We are inaccord with the appellate courts’ holding xxxthat since the Titulo was not registered underAct No. 496 , otherwise known as the LandRegistration Act, said Titulo is inferior to theregistered titles of the private respondentsOcampo, Buhain and Dela Cruz (i.e. of thenotorious OCT 614 and OCT 333). xxx“This Court can only surmise that the reasonfor non-registration of the Titulo under Torrenssystem is lack of necessary documents to bepresented to comply with P.D. 892 . We do notdiscount the possibility that the Spanish title inquestion is not genuine, especially since itsgenuineness & due execution have not beenproven. In both cases, petitioners-heirs werenot able to present the original of Titulo Prop.4136 nor a genuine copy thereof.”


4. But, what now if, contrary to the belief of Hon. Supreme Court, Titulo Prop.4136 of April 25, 1894 had alreadybeen submitted to, and passed rigid

examination of Land Reg. Cas1861 & N-1876 ? What if, indeed,has already been such a Torrenissued in favor of “heirs oMariano San Pedro” necessarilystrict investigation of Titulo 4136 of April 25, 1894? Tears werby the helpless poor; many expefeeling of deep remorse rising withhonest souls, when their last ho justice had fled in Dec.1996. Will forsake them again when at stake the precious honor they cherish abelse, when much that is left is the mof those who tried to redeem the digthe poor and relentlessly fought 4136? To goddess of Truth, we praisnow with our gratitude, sincMotherland will be redeemed, we’ve found greater power of Tmysterious Titulo Prop. 4136! --thope of the poor, that was v

maligned and ruthlessly assailcombined forces of unscru-pulouand dark political powers that be The Titulo Prop. 4136 has now gonto life to save and give justice to thand oppressed and to help Philippines to Golden Age!

5. Indeed! There is really such TTitle (or Orig. Cert. of Title) that issueof Titulo Prop. 4136 of April 25, 1894it’s not just one, but two! (Pls. sorderly Land Reg. Cases No. N-1861 & NSee also Partial Decision of Judge EmMunoz in Oct. 12, 1970 thereon. Pls. also sOCTs 0-5617 & 0-5797 of Hon. Reg. of DMeycauayan, Bul. The Torrens Titles havdiscovered only in 2001, and have becoobject of complaint of Quieting of Title Bulacan RTC against the false heirs, al



them with San Pedro surnames. The titles werehidden by false San Pedro heirs, seeminglybecause of coming confirmation of DonAlejandro San Pedro as “next of kin and truelegal heir of Don Mariano San Pedro”—i.e., withhis most authentic Spanish docu-ments,discovered from 400 year-old church of Sta. Anain Taguig.

TP 4136 of April 25, 1894 had, indeed,been submitted in a Land Reg. Case under Act496. Original of TP 4136 was necessa-rilyshown, & examined (as indicated in therecords), and found in order, so that in 1972,after due notice & hearing, the fact-finding and jurisdictional land reg. court, which is a court “inrem”, whose decision is final and against thewhole world, (after lapse of a no. of years), issuedforth a decree for issuance of Torrens Titles,namely, OCTs 0-5617 & 0-5797. TCTs also issuedfrom OCTs, were transferred to innocentpurchasers for value, and are now valid &perfect titles.


ANALYSIS:

1. The Partial Decision of Judge E. Munoz thatfound Titulo Prop. 4136 to be in order,--as well ashis issuance of judicial Decree for registration of the land thereof, and the final release of OCTs tosaid lands within Titulo Prop. 4136 of April 25,1894,--is of absolute Judicial Notice in Phil. jurisdiction, specially to Hon. Supreme Court.

2. The question of validity of Titulo Prop. 4136

issued on April 25, 1894, after same was dulyexamined and found in order by the Hon. LandReg. Court in “in-rem” proceedings, has become“res judicata”. Therefore, the said "en banc"Decision of the Hon. Supreme Court is in fact“ultra vires” on its part; and, hence, it acquiredno juris-diction on Titulo Prop. 4136. Forcing the

issue would result into grave abuse of discretion that would just the same resultinto lack of jurisdiction. Hon. Supreme Courtcan’t Order new trial to correct its ‘mistake’since doing so will result to “double jeopardy”against judicially confirmed next of “kin” andlegal heir of Don Mariano; neither can itpromulgate today, “motu propio”, a new judgment to correct the previous one where it“erred” because of stark absence of fair trial, & sowould be lacking and be without “due process“.Indeed, the validity of TP 4136 of April 25, 1894has become “res judicata” after it passed strictexamination in Land Reg. Cases N-1861 & N-1876, which are cases “in rem” that acquirednotice & jurisdiction to whole world, and, as proof thereof, have resulted, the issuance of OCTs 0-5617 & 0-5797, together with equally perfect &valid TCTs that now passed to 3rd parties who’reinnocent purchasers for value.

3. Thus, how, Hon. Supreme Court speakswith voice of god, & is infallible, and cannot

err. Everything, including its seemingmistake, is part of larger design for good of all and country. The most logical reading of motive in its said controversial 1996 en bancdecision is that:--since lands under TP 4136 can’tanymore revert to be “public land” (for lands under TP 4136 have since 1894 been owned as privatelands, & were registered w/ Spanish Mortgage Law,& Treaty of Paris of 1898); and it ‘s been a time-honored principle that “what’s been private landcan’t anymore become public”, & since public-interest San Pedro Found-ation has been preparedby judicially confirmed next of “kin” & true legalheir—(ready) to assert people’s interest, & to avoidlands getting to fall to landgrabber-developers, (&to false heirs & fraudulent San Pedro claimants),--Hon. Supreme Court in a stroke of statesmanship,and of activist judicial wisdom, though not easily

understood & discernible to most, has wrote finish to celebrated San Pedro contro

LEGAL BRIEF ON TITULO PROP. 4136,

4. And so our faith in the Hon. SuCourt has been strength-ened even but only after we have now understood the whole intent ramifications of their 1996 “en Decision on San Pedro case. IndeeHon. Supreme Court dispenses justall, but ultimately sides withdisadvantaged people, and that, todrejoice because the people themselvbe served and benefited by draresolution on ownership of vast traland in question. On the side of juconfirmed next of kin and true legal heknow of their great sacrifices for the coand they are always like today serving ainstruments for greater cause and social It is befitting to remember that Don Ale

died a decent man; he was poor, but he the country well, during World War II hevolunteer guerrilla boy-runner underWalter Cushing Guerrilla Unit undedangerous missions behind enemy linesage of 14 yrs.; Don Luis his father was anRizalista master who died in the war supervising the activities of their natorg.; Don Luis’ beautiful wife Dona GoPascual, herself, suffered severe torturKempetais, because she would not information, out of love for country afamily that went underground to fig

Japanese; Don Mariano himself, while bSpanish subject, and a Mason, was ragreat liberal tradition; he was an indunobleman, as he in fact toiled his wprominence, even meriting great concessions from the grateful civil goverof his time—(then on the verged of



overthrown by nescient Philippine rebellion). DonMariano provided indispensable service in publicworks to the Spanish Crown and the Office of the Gov. Gen. of the Islands.

FURTHER ANALYSIS:

1. In the manner of seeking justice, DonAlejandro San Pedro was honest & aboveboard in his petitions with Hon. Courts. Don

Alejandro didn’t have service of top law firms thatentail high costs, he signed (w/ his lawyers his ownpetitions to govt., but he’d original & authenticSpanish documents of heirship with Don Mariano,which he submitted to Hon. Courts,--and the truthwon the day for him. (Pls. see Resolution en banc of Hon. Supreme Court, dated Feb. 28, 1989--directing Judge Carlos Ofilada himself to look forreal heirs of Don Mariano--pls. see (jurisdictional &fact finding) Court Orders (dated Jan. 28,1996 & June13, 1997) of Judge Ofilada that determined &confirmed Don Alejandro San Pedro, Sr. as next of kin & true legal heir of Don Mariano San Pedro.)


2. In regard to trial on appeal initiated byPedro Ignacio, alias Engracio San Pedro,in Supreme Court, Don Alejandronaturally sided with Judge Fernandez &Govt. It‘s the “truth presentation” of genuine &authentic old Spanish documents (establishing hiskinship with Don Mariano), which encouragedHon. Supreme Court to destroy land & squattersyndicates (at that time led by, inter alia, aliasEngracio San Pedro), and to write finish to San

Pedro controversy. When Hon. Supreme Courtfinally issued its en banc Decision on the SanPedro estate, Don Alejandro lost no time insending his “Manipestasyon at Papuri” to Hon.Supreme Court, and the Hon. Court returned the

gesture with rewards, i.e. thru Hon. Judge Ofiladain Spec.Proc. 312-B.

3. Don Alejandro had his seeming rewardsin fight against unscru-pulous landsyndicates, & against false heirs &fraudulent claimants. Don Alejandro’s kinshipand heirship with Don Mariano had been fullyestablished & confirmed. He was made SpecialAdm., by Hon. Court, for true and legal estate of

Don Mariano San Pedro. Don Alejandro was alsogranted “authority to sell 169 has.” within theadjudicated 445 has. San Pedro property inNorzagaray, Bul. And lastly, the SEC gave him fullauthority and reserved to him alone the use of the name “Don Mariano E. San Pedro Foundation,Inc.” as title of foundation.

4. In gratitude to Govt. & the people, whenDon Alejandro prepared and personallywrote his holographic Will, he first securedenough part (20%) of San Pedro estate for thesake of his heirs & his illegi-timate & legitimate

sisters in pro-indiviso equal shares; then he soughtto inform all & sundry the need to vest San PedroFoundation with enabling funds totalling 80% of whole San Pedro estate for sake of country, toredeem the poor, to advance S&T, modernizeindustries, upgrade human settlements, & tomaintain country’s peace & order.

5. Final justice is poetic justice. And lastly,since syndicates & un-scrupulous malefactors of TP 4136 have greatly abused & exploited thename of our beloved Don Mariano, i.e. inamassing hundred thou-sand has., & in adversely

occupying vast tracts of land, as inventoried in1976 Order of Judge Fernandez, & in collection of double II plans in the name of Don IgnacioConrado: it’s the stand of this represent-ation &of San Pedro Foundation, in regard to ownership of those lands, that: The law on agency holds! And

we declare, that, howsoever much theacquired & however far they have gone to the name of Don Mariano, there will weover to prosecute the interest of Sanestate--which is now owned & administeSan Pedro Foundation--necessarily, “foprogress & world understanding”.

LEGAL BRIEF ON TITULO PROP. 4136, P

CONNECTING ANALYSIS:

1. (Such is nature of “Estate of the DeceBefore its final “exe-cution” in a Will or termof its “administration”, it partakes of dycharacter, enabling it to grow by sound mnsuccession of its administrators or tenants voluntary counterparts), or a windfall mayfrom nowhere to enrich it more. Or, due mngt., the estate is dissipated, but if showing of fraud or bad faith, the adminitrustee or tenant, voluntary or not, hebecomes responsible; & like in agency

implied trustee, his gains in using the nambody of estate redound not to him but alwestate, while he alone suffers, and sprosecuted for loss & damage he incuvoluntarily committed.--Adapted from definitions given to “estate of the deceasBlack’s Law Dictionary,)

2. In this connection: the 50,000lands in Quezon, Rizal & Laguna chave been validly acquired by Green Prop. Corp. from any supposed seller it tranthat only misrepresented San Pedro estat

see G.R.139274 , Oct. 23, 2001, Quezonetc. vs. Hon. A. M. Marte, et al.) The originDecl. issued in favor of heirs of Don MariaPedro is, and remains, valid.

3. We must bear in mind that sucDecl. for 50,000 has. in Quezon, R



Laguna provinces is in name of Heirs of DonMariano San Pedro. They are here alive, judicially confirmed as “next of kin” & “true legalheirs” of Don Mariano, & vested with legitimate judicial power to succeed the deceased andadminister San Pedro estate.

4. Now that the provincial govt. of Quezonreceived mandate from Hon. SupremeCourt in refusing to honor tax payments by

Green Square, the real property rights (or original& legal right & privilege of ownership) thusremain with said true owners of the property,being the “estate of Don Mariano E. SanPedro”,--whose present devisee-owner andinstitutional judicial administrator is the DonMariano E. San Pedro Foundation, Inc.

5. The Provincial Government of Quezon (inviolation of the Constitutional right to propertyof the judicially confirmed next of kin and truelegal heirs of Don Mariano San Pedro) cannotnow invalidate the original Tax Declaration in

the name of Heirs of Don Mariano E. San Pedro(now to be replaced by Don Alejandro P. SanPedro—the judicially confirmed “next of kin” and“true legal heir” of Don Mariano San Pedro), i.e. inthe aftermath of the criminal sales transactionsbetween said fraudulent parties.


6. The fraudulent alleged-administrator,who is supposedly an officer of Court, butdidn’t have any legal mandate on record(or whose mandate has expired on date of sales-

transaction with Green Square, in Aug. 1996),together with Hon. Court who approved thetransaction, must bear full responsibility of crim.act of large-scale estafa. (Legal San Pedro estate,& San Pedro Foundn.--being institutional jud. adm.,is innocent & clean on this sales-transaction,

they’re victims here, & mustn’t be visited by evilconsequence of guilt of fraudulent parties.)

7. For its part, Green Square, companyinvolved in realty business as it is, if it’snot a colluding co-conspirator in crim.transaction, must have exercised caution &always bear in mind the adage of “caveat emptor”,even as (particularly) because of its greed, it chosenot to transact with rightful owner, Don Alejandro,

who, at right time, had just been determined asnext of kin & true legal heir of Don Mariano, inaddition to being appointed by jurisdictional & fact-finding Hon. Court as new Spl. Adm. of “estate of Don Mariano San Pedro”. (Pls. see Bul. RTC, Br. 15,SPC 312-B, Pres. Judge C. Ofilada, Court Order,dated Jan. 31, 1996, w/bond posted, & issuedLetters of Spl.Adm. dated Apr.15,1996. Pls. compare said dates with Green Square’s date of fraudulent-acqui-sition—Aug.1996, allegedly from“estate of Don Mariano San Pedro”.)

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The question of validity of TP 4136 of April 25, 1894, after same was dulyexamined & found in order by LR Court in“in-rem” proceed-ings, has become “res

judicata”. Thus, said "en banc" Decision of Hon.Supreme Court is in fact “ultra vires” on its part;hence, it acquired no juris-diction on TP 4136.Forcing the issue results in grave abuse of discretion that just the same results into lack of jurisdiction. Hon. Supreme Court can’t Order newtrial to correct its mistake since doing so results to“double jeopardy” against jud. confirmed next of

“kin” & true legal heirs of Don Mariano. NeitherHon. Sup. Court can promulgate today, “motupropio”, new judgment to correct previous onewhere it erred because of absence of fair trial, & willthus be lacking “due process“. To repeat, validityof TP 4136 of Ap. 25, 1894 becomes “res judicata”

after it passed strict exami-nation in LR Ca1861 & N-1876, which are cases “in remacquired notice & jurisdiction to whole worldproof thereof, have resulted, issuance of O5617 & 0-5797, together w/ equally perfect TCTs that now passed to 3rd parties who’re inpurchasers for value.

2. Indeed, the discovery of 1971/72 0-5617 & 0-5797, under LR Cases N-1

N-1876, has resulted in full compliance4136 with the requirements of PD 8the validity of the Spanish Title.

LEGAL BRIEF ON TITULO PROP. 4136, P

TP 4136 now remains valid Title for whole 173,0(214,047 quiniones), covering lands in prNva.Ecija, Bul., Rizal, Laguna & Quezon; &cities as Quezon, Cal., Pasay, Pasig, Tagg., PPrnqe., Muntin., Mlbon., Mandlyng., Navts., MS.J., Valnzla. & Mla., thus affecting in genextending from Mal., Bul. to City Hall of Quland area between Dingalan Bay in the n

Tayabas Bay in the south.”

3. Titulo Prop. 4136 of April 25, 1894, is declared as inde-feasible, imprescriptibleneither be annulled or voided nor subjeprescription or laches, ‘til the end of timdespite (or by reason of) the Decision en Hon. Supreme Court on San Pedro casNos.103727 & 106496, Dec.18, 1996,---ipsoin light of the discovery of 1971/1972 Origof Titles (OCTs) No. 0-5617 and 0-5797Land Reg. Cases N-1861 & N-1876.

RECOMMENDATIONS:1. There’s no need to file any cases in crevalidate Titulo Prop. 4136, because, fothe Supreme Court en banc Decision has bfinal & executory. And it clearly lays in banc Decision the ground rule for validaany Spanish title, thus: “……The he



successors-in-interest of Mariano San Pedro arenot without recourse. P.D. 892, xx, grants allholders of Spanish Titles the right to apply for registration of their lands under Act 496, or LandReg. Act, within 6 months from effectivity of theDecree.”

2. It suffices to say that said 1996 en bancDecision (on San Pedro estate) of Hon. SupremeCourt has, ipso facto, officially clarified the 2

confusing version of Spanish titulo, TP 4136 of Apr. 25,1894 is real & valid Span. Title of SanPedro estate, & it covers (as affirmed by Hon.Supreme Court en banc) “lands in provs. of Nva.Ecija, Bul., Rizal, Laguna & Quezon; & M.Mla.cities as Quez., Cal., Psay., Tag., Pasig & Mla., thusaffecting in gen. lands extending from Mal., Bul.to Quez.City Hall of & land area bet. Dingalan Bay in the north & Tayabas Bay in the south”.

3. With orig. (security) copy of OCTs 0-5617 & 0-5797, under LR Cases N-1861 & N-1876, officiallykept & maintained in vault of Bul. RD, i.e. to prove

compliance of TP 4138 to PD 892, San Pedro est.,thru its owner & insttnl. jud.admin. (San PedroFound.)--only now needs to execute its Affid. of Adjud. over TP 4136, appending same to holog. Willof Don Alejandro (w/ attached Court Order of Probate) to submit to concerned RDs whereproperties lay, & to publish the same for all the worldto know & understand!

By: Prof. A.D. SanPedro

Chairman/PresidentNo.38 Gurrero St., Taguig

[email protected] T- 839-7014

The Power of Truth vs. the en Banc Decision of the Supreme Court

Documents

Transcript of The Power of Truth vs. the en Banc Decision of the Supreme Court