FACTS:

On May 31, 1952, private respondents Victoriano and Agustin Bingcoy filed a Complaint for
Recovery of Property in the Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial Court) of Negros
Oriental. Docketed as Civil Case No. 2728 and raffled to Branch 37, the complaint alleged that
petitioners, some time in July, 1948, attacked private respondents at their residence in Barrio Bongbong,
Municipality of Valencia, Province of Negros Oriental, shot at their hogs and chickens and seriously
threatened to shoot private respondents if they did not leave their house and their lands. Fearing for
their lives, private respondents instinctively jumped out of their house and ran away. Thereupon,
petitioners usurped private respondents house and lands, occupied the same to the deprivation of
private respondents and refused, after repeated requests and demands, to vacate the same and restore
private respondents in the possession of their properties.

In their complaint before the court, private respondents claimed that Juan Cumayao died
intestate years ago, without any payable obligation, leaving three legitimate children: Victoriano,
Agustin, and Prudencio, all surnamed Bingcoy as his heirs. He also left three parcels of land in Valencia
and Negros Oriental. Prudencio Bingcoy, brother of the private respondents, also died, single, without
issue, nor adopted child, intestate and without payable obligation left the private respondents as his
only heirs and a parcel of land located at Bongbong, Negros Oriental.

Petitioners countered private respondents allegations by presenting a true copy of the Death
Certificate of Juan Cumayao which indicated that the latter had died single on July 17, 1926 at the age of
fifty (50) years. They thus established the defense that, since Juan Cumayao died single and without any
known children, he could not have passed on, by inheritance, the subject properties to private
respondents. To establish their claim of ownership on the subject properties, petitioners claim that the
same originally belonged to spouses Marcos Cumayao and Francisca Morales, parents of Juan Cumayao
and grandparents of petitioners.

On September 1, 1964, trial commenced. Private respondent Victoriano Bingcoy took the
stand. He testified on the contents of the following documents:

1. A certificate issued by the Local Civil Registrar of Zamboanguita marked by the court a
quo as Exhibit A. This is to certify that Juan Cumayao and Claudia Bingcoy, both residents of
the municipality of Valencia, Negros Oriental, which was married in this municipality
according to the informant, was marked as Exhibit 1-a for the defendants.
2. The marriage certificate of Agustin Bingcoy and Luisa Dacoyan secured from the priest of the
town of Luzuriaga marked as Exhibit B.
3. A deed of sale in favor of Juan Cumayao.
4. Tax Declaration No. 2621 in the name of Juan Camayao.

Victoriano Bingcoy continued testifying on several other documents that established private
respondents claim of ownership over the subject properties. On July 25, 1991, the trial court rendered
judgment in favor of private respondents. Finding sufficient evidence on record proving that ownership
over the subject parcels of land was vested in private respondents as prior possessors in good faith in
the concept of owner and as illegitimate heirs of Juan Cumayao. The petitioners disagreed with the
decision of the trial court and appealed therefrom to the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE:

(1) WON the trial court committed a reversible error in ruling that private respondents are
illegitimate children of Juan Cumayao.

(2) WON the private respondents, although illegitimate children, are entitled to inherit the
estate of deceased Juan Cumayao.
HELD:

(1) No.

The presumption that a child was born is legitimate as provided for in Article 220 of the New Civil Code
is overcome by the death certificate issued by the OIC Local Civil Registrar of the Municipality of
Valencia, Province of Negros Oriental where it appears that Juan Cumayao died single on July 17, 1926 x
x x. It is a well-settled rule that a death certificate, if duly registered with the Civil Registrar, is considered
a public document and the entries found therein are presumed correct (Stronghold Insurance Co., Inc. vs.
Court of Appeals, May 29, 1989; 173 SCRA 620). Said presumption is merely disputable and will have to
yield to more positive evidence establishing their inaccuracy x x x.

The private respondents evidence on this matter is neither positive nor convincing. Aside from the
testimony of appellee Victoriano Bingcoy, they presented a witness by the name of Pedro Milan who was
76 years old at the time he testified. He averred on the witness stand that he knew Juan Cumayao and
Claudia Bingcoy to be the parents of herein appellees that he knew appellees since they were born as he
was their neighbor at Bongbong, Valencia. While it has been established that Juan Cumayao begot herein
appellees, the fact that he died single proves that he had children without having been married. In the
absence of clear evidence to show that appellees parents were married, the conclusion is inevitable that
appellees were born out of wedlock.

Appellees explanation that it was their grandmother who opted for them to use the surname Bingcoy is
totally incongruent with public customs and morals and human experience. No natural mother and for
matter, a grandmother, under Filipino tradition, would allow a child not to use the surname of his father if
he were really legitimate, considering the stigma that would necessarily attach to a child who is not
allowed to use the surname of his own father.

There are no other evidence to sustain appellants claim that their parents were in fact married to
controvert the statement in the death certificate that Juan Cumayao died single. Appellees have not
established by sufficient evidence the fact of marriage between their parents. Neither is there any
evidence showing that both parents of appellees have no legal impediment to marry.

(2) No.

Under the Civil Code, for an illegitimate child other than natural to inherit, she must first be
recognized voluntarily or by court action. This arises from the legal principle that an unrecognized
spurious child like a natural child has no rights from her parents or to their estate because her rights spring
not from the filiation or blood relationship but from the childs acknowledgment by the parent. In other
words, the rights of an illegitimate child arose not because she was the true and real child of her parents
but because under the law, she has been recognized or acknowledged as such a child.

Article 131 of the old Civil Code states that the acknowledgment of a natural child must be made
in the record of birth, in a will or in some other public document.

Naturally, and understandably so, repondents did not present any evidence that they have been
acknowledged by Juan Cumayao by reason of their original stand that they are legitimate children of Juan
Cumayao. There being no proof that respondents were acknowledged by Juan Cumayao as his illegitimate
children, respondents could not therefore legally inherit from the estate of the deceased Juan Cumayao.

However, the private respondents took possession of the land for a period of 22 years. Under
Section 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Act No. 190, to wit:

SEC. 41. Title to land by prescription. - Ten years actual adverse possession by any
person claiming to be the owner for that time of any land or interest in land, uninterruptedly
continued for ten years by occupancy, descent, grants, or otherwise, in whatever way such
occupancy may have commenced or continued, shall vest in every actual occupant or possessor
of such land a full and complete title.

Thus, even if the repondents are not entitled to inherit from Juan Cumayao, they have
acquired ownership over the parcels of land.