SPOUSES RODULFO N. JUDILLA AND CLEOFE A. JUDILLA, APPLICANTS-APPELLEES, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR-APPELLANT.

On 12 December 2013, the Court issued a Resolution^[1] directing the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) to submit anew proof of receipt by applicants-appellees of its Appellant’s Brief within ten (10) days from receipt, and to file its comment to the applicants-appellees’ Motion to Withdraw Application for Original Application of Title^[2].

In its Manifestation and Motion (In Lieu of Comment)^[3] dated 22 January 2014, the OSG pointed out that it has already submitted to this Court their compliance with the registry return receipt attached thereto as proof that applicants-appellees’ counsel received the Appellant’s Brief on 29 November 2013. Moreover, the OSG alleged that it is interposing no objection to plaintiffs-appellees’ Motion to Withdraw Application for Original Application of Title.

In their Motion, applicants-appellees averred that:

x x x    x x x    x x x.

2. After careful review of the arguments presented by the Solicitor General’s Office, the Applicants-Appellees is (sic) of the conclusion that indeed the evidence its (sic) has presented is insufficient in complying with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Tan Properties, nc., 555 SCRA 477, as to the certification from the DENR Secretary, had approved the land classification and release the land as alienable and disposable, which decision was reiterated in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Arcadio Ivan A. Santos III, et al., G.R. No. 160453, November 12, 2013.

3. It is therefore appropriate this present application be withdrawn in order for the applicants-Appellees to secure the proper and necessary documents in support of their Application for Registration of Title;

x x x    x x x    x x x.^[4]

We find the applicants-appellees’ prayer to withdraw their original application of title to be well-taken, and not contrary to law, public order and policy, morals and good customs.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, We resolve to:

1. NOTE the Compliance dated 25 November 2013 filed by the Office of the Solicitor General;

2. GRANT the plaintiffs-appellees’ Motion to Withdraw Application for Original Application of Title;

3. NULLIFY and SET ASIDE the appealed Decision dated 22 December 2011 rendered by the Regional Trial Court of Mandaue City, Branch 55 in LRA Case No. N-710 (LRA Record No. N-79549).

Accordingly, the instant case is hereby deemed CLOSED and TERMINATED.

SO ORDERED.

Hernando, and Quijano-Padilla, JJ., concur.

---

^[1] Rollo, pp. 97-98

^[2] Id. at 88-90

^[3] Id. at 99-102

^[4] Id. at 88-89