RAMOS VS.

DIRECTOR OF LANDS
G.R. No. L-13298, November 19, 1918
FACTS:
Restituo Romero gained possession of a considerable tract of land located in Nueva Ecija. He
took advantage of the Royal Decree to obtain a possessory information title to the land and was
registered as such. Parcel No. 1 included within the limits of the possessory information title of
Romero was sold to Cornelio Ramos, herein petitioner. Ramos instituted appropriate proceedings
to have his title registered. Director of Lands opposed on the ground that Ramos had not
acquired a good title from the Spanish government. Director of Forestry also opposed on the
ground that the first parcel of land is forest land. It has been seen however that the predecessor in
interest to the petitioner at least held this tract of land under color of title.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the actual occupancy of a part of the land described in the instrument giving
color of title sufficient to give title to the entire tract of land?
DECISION:
The general rule is that possession and cultivation of a portion of a tract of land under the claim
of ownership of all is a constructive possession of all, if the remainder is not in the adverse
possession of another. The claimant has color of title; he acted in good faith and he has open,
peaceable, and notorious possession of a portion of the property, sufficient to apprise the
community and the world that the land was for his enjoyment. Possession in the eyes of the law
does not mean that a man has to have his feet on every square meter of ground before it can be
said that he is in possession. Ramos and his predecessor in interest fulfilled the requirements of
the law on supposition that the premises consisted of agricultural public land. On the issue of
forest land, Forest reserves of public land can be established as provided by law. When the claim
of the citizen and the claim of the government as to a particular piece of property collide, if the
Government desires to demonstrate that the land is in reality a forest, the Director of Forestry
should submit to the court convincing proof that the land is not more valuable for agricultural
than for forest purposes. In this case, the mere formal opposition on the part of the Attorney-
General for the Director of Forestry, unsupported by satisfactory evidence will not stop the
courts from giving title to the claimant. Petitioner and appellant has proved a title to the entire
tract of land for which he asked for registration. Registration in the name of the petitioner is
hereby granted.
at corporations could not acquire, hold or lease public agricultural lands in excess of 1,024 hecta