[G.R. No. 130876 April 3, 2001]

ALONSO [DECEASED], et al. vs. CA et al.

EN BANC

Gentleman:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated APR 3 2001.

G.R. No. 130876 (Francisco Alonso [deceased], substituted by Mercedes V. Alonso, Tomas V. Alonso and Asuncion V. Alonso vs. Court of Appeals, et al.)

The Court Resolved to: (a) NOTE the Motion for Leave to file Rejoinders to petitioner’s reply (to the Solicitor General’s Comment) and GRANT its motion to admit attached to rejoinder, dated 28 February 2001 (filed in Court on 26 March 2001, 8:53 A.M.) filed by counsel for private respondent Cebu Country Club, Inc.: (b) NOTE the aforesaid rejoinder, dated 28 February 2001; and (c) NOTE the Urgent Ex parte manifestation dated 3 April 2001, filed by counsel by petitioners and GRANT the prayer that they be allowed to use visual equipment consisting of a mobile computer, a Multimedia LCD projector and a projection screen.

At the hearing of this case this morning, Attys. Leovino Silva, Gavino Benitez, Leopoldo Africa and Agustin Benitez appeared for petitioner with Atty. Agustin Benitez arguing. Attys. Jess Anthony N. Garcia, Julius Z. Neri, Melina Almase Martinez and Teodoro A. Almase appeared for private respondent Cebu Country Club, Inc. with Atty. Almase arguing. Assistant Solicitor General Mariano M. Martinez and Solicitor General Simeon V. Marcelo appeared for the Government with Solicitor General Marcelo arguing.

Before the start of the arguments, the Chief Justice informed the parties that the Court has formulated the following issues:

(a) Whether administrative reconstitution of title is proper;

(b) Granting that administrative reconstitution was proper, was reconstitution of title of Cebu Country Club obtained fraudulently;

(c) Assuming that reconstitution was fraudulent, whether prescription of action or laches had set in; and

(d) Under the circumstance obtaining, has the property in question, Lot No. 727 of the Banilad Friar lands Estate, become private property?

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court requested the Solicitor General to include in his memorandum (a) a discussion on whether the execution of the Certificate of Sale of friar lands requires the approval by the Secretary of Agriculture and not merely approval by the Director of Lands; and (b) to state who among the contending parties would have better right to the property in question.

After oral arguments on the issues presented by the Court, the Court further Resolved to require the parties to SUBMIT simultaneously their respective MEMORANDA, to expound or amplify the issues, within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) days from date. Thereafter, with or without the Memoranda, this case shall be deemed SUBMITTED for resolution. Panganiban & Yñares-Santiago, JJ. No part.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Asst. Clerk of Court