JUAN ADUAN, ET AL., APPLICANTS AND APPELLEES, VS. PANTALEON ALBA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS AND APPELLANTS.

Sometime in 1956 appellees filed a petition before the Court of First
Instance of La Union for the registration of a parcel of land situated in
Aringay, La Union, known as Lot No. 6698-B of the Aringay cadastre. The petition
was published in the Official Gazette as required by law and notice thereof
given, among others, to the Solicitor General, Director of Lands and Director of
Forestry. On September 29, 1956, after hearing on the merits, the court rendered
judgment ordering tne registration of the land in the name of appellees.
Thereafter, Original Certificate of Title No. 0-247 was issued in their
favor.

On March 26, 1958, appellees filed a motion for a writ of possession
alleging, among other things, that during the pendency of the case one Juan
Dulay, together with appellants Pantaleon Alba and Macario Alba, were allowing
their animals to pasture within the premises of the land covered by their title
thereby destroying the crops existing thereon and praying that said individuals
be enjoined from interfering with the ownership thereof.

On May 12, 1958, Juan Dulay filed an opposition claiming that his
father-in-law, Prudencio Gundran, is the registered owner of a portion of land
included in the area registered in the name of appellees and which at the time
was the subject of Civil Case No. 1252 pending before the Court of First
Instance of La Union. Macario Alba, Pantaleon Alba and Ariston Cagujas also
opposed the motion on the ground that portions of the land registered in the
name of the appellees were occupied by them and are the subject of an
application for homestead they filed with the Bureau of Lands and so they cannot
be deprived thereof. Thereupon, appellees and oppositors submitted a stipulation
of facts wherein they agreed to exclude from the scope of the motion the
northern portion of the land covered by Civil Case No. 1252, and on the strength
of said stipulation the trial court issued an order directing the issuance of
the writ prayed for.

On December 18, 1958, Juan Dulay filed a motion for reconsideration with
regard to the portion occupied by his father-in-law which was excluded from the
writ in the stipulation of facts, and considering that it committed an
oversight, the court granted the motion excluding from the order the above
portion and striking out the name of Dulay from the record. And their opposition
having been disregarded, Pantaleon Alba and Macario Alba interposed the present
appeal.

The main theme of appellants is that the trial court erred in not nullifying
the certificate of title issued in the name of appellees considering that the
land applied for by them is forestry in character and as such could not have
been acquired by them. They also claimed that the decree of registration issued
by the registration court is null and void because being in possession of
portions of the land applied for by appellees they have never been notified of
the petition for registration filed by appellees as required by law.

This claim cannot be entertained. Even if it were true that the portions of
the land registered in the name of appellees are forestry in character, the
right to raise the issue relative to the validity of their acquisition ia not
the concern of appellants but of the Bureau of Forestry which is not a party to
this case. It appears, however, that when appellees applied for the registration
of the property in question the Bureau of Forestry was duly notified of the
proceedings and yet it did not file any opposition thereto, a circumstance which
in a way belies the claim of appellants.

While it may be true that appellants may not have been notified of the
petition for registration in spite of the fact that they were allegedly in
possession of portions of the land applied for, no importance can be attached to
their claim it appearing that they were occupying a portion of a forest land
which they intend to apply for as homestead. Their right to. the land is,
therefore, merely subsidiary to that of the government. Moreover, the petition
waa published in Hhe Official Gazette, which is deemed to be a sufficient notice
in contemplation of law.

The order appealed from is affirmed, without costs.

Bengzon, Acting
C.J., Padilla, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes, and Dizon,
JJ., concur.