
    Ex Parte Sojo.
    Appeal from the District Court of San Juan.
    No. 92.
    Decided March 20, 1904.
    Dominion Title — Original Petition Por Institution of Proceedings. — Although, in the original petition for the institution of proceedings to estab- ■ lish ownership of real property, it should be'stated whether or not the petitioner lacks a written title of ownership, nevertheless, the petition having been admitted without such, requisite, and without objection on the part of the court or of the JFiscal, it is not proper, after all the legal formalities have been complied with, to deny approval of the proceedings for want of such requisite, the omission of which should have been corrected by the court at the proper time.
    Id. — Possession to Acquire Ownership. — Quiet, peaceable and uninterrupted possession for a period of more than twenty years, in good faith and with a proper title, is sufficient to establish the ownership of real estate for the purposes of record in the Registry of Property.
    STATEMENT OF THE CASE. '
    This is a proceeding instituted in the District Court of San Juan by Mariano Pesquera, on behalf of his wife, Maria Ana Sojo y del Valle, in respect to a declaration of ownership of a lot situated at the place known as “Minillas,” in the ward of Santurce, of this city, which case is pending before us on appeal taken by the applicant from the decision rendered by aforesaid district court, which decision reads as follows:
    “San Juan, Porto Eico, June 15, 1903. Mariano Pesquera, on behalf of his wife, María Ana Sojo, instituted proceedings in this court to establish the ownership of a lot situated in the ward of Santurce, San Juan, at the place known as ‘Minillas,’ said lot having an area of 821 70-100 square meters, which property was acquired by purchase from José Maria Eosado, being valued at five hundred dollars, without stating whether or not she lacked a written title of ownership.
    “The proceedings were conducted with citation of the Fiscal, all the legal formalities being observed.
    “Inasmuch as only owners who have no written title of ownership can resort to the summary means allowed by the Mortgage Law for the purpose of establishing ownership, this most essential condition must be proven, or at least alleged, for the successful issue of the proceedings.
    “In view of article 395 of the Mortgage Law, the declaration of ownership applied for cannot be made.
    “Decided and signed by the court, to which I certify. Juan Morera Martínez, Frank H. Eichmond, José Tous Soto. — Luis Mén-dez Vaz.”
    From this decision Mariano Pesquera took an appeal, wbicli was allowed for a review and stay of proceedings, and tbe record forwarded to tbis Supreme. Court, after citation of tbe parties. Tbe appellant having appeared, tbe appeal was conducted under tbe proper procedure, and a day set for tbe bearing, at wbicli appeared counsel for tbe appellant and tbe Fiscal of tbe court, wbo contested tbe appeal.
    
      Mr. Castro (Crus), for appellant.
    
      Mr. del Toro, Fiscal, for the People’.
   Me. Chibe . Justice QuiñoNes,

after making tbe above statement of facts, delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.

The findings of fact contained in the judgment appealed from are accepted.

Moreover, the proposed proceedings to establish ownership having been admitted, with the citations prescribed by law, including that of the Fiscal of the district, three witnesses of age, who are property owners and residents of the locality, testified that they know of their own knowledge that Ana María So jo y del Valle had really and truly acquired by purchase from José María Rosario the lot for which application of ownership was made on July 26, 1901, since which date she had been in the quiet, peaceable and uninterrupted possession thereof; and that it was equally true that the previous owner of said lot, José Rosario, had possessed it in like manner for more than twenty years, having acquired it by inheritance from his mother, Juana Maria Rosario.

Although, .in the original petition for the institution of proceedings of this class, it should he stated whether or not the petitioner lacks a written title of ownership, a condition required by article 395 of the Mortgage Law, so that, in a proper ca'se, the petitioner may establish his right of ownership in the manner prescribed by said article; yet, the petition for the institution of the present inquiry having been admitted without said requisite, and without any objection, either on the part of the court, which should have refused it outright, or of the Fiscal of the district, who was duly cited for the taking of evidence, considerable hardship would be caused to the petitioner were the admission of the desired investigation to be now refused, after all the stages of procedure had been gone through in accordance with law, because of the omission of a requisite the correction whereof could in due time have been decreed by the court.

On the other hand, the petitioner having established by the corroborative evidence of three witnesses of legal age, property owners and residents of the locality, that the present owner, María Ana Sojo, and her predecessor in interest,' José Maria Rosario, liad between the two been in the quiet, peaceable and uninterrupted possession of the lot in question, in good faith and with just titles, for a period of time exceeding twenty years, there exist sufficient proofs for making a declaration of ownership as requested by .the petitioner, for the purposes of its admission to record in the Registry of Property.

In view of the article of' the Mortgage Law of the Island cited herein, the Judicial Order of April 4, 1899, and other articles of the Civil Code in force, applicable to the case, we adjudge that we should reverse and do reverse the judgment appealed from, and declare that the lot described in the petition for this inquiry belongs to María Ana So jo y del Valle, and accordingly direct that she be furnished with a certified copy of the present decision and of such other data from the record of proceedings as might be called for by her for the purpose of entering said ownership in the Registry of Property.

Justices Hernández, Pigueras and MacLeary concurred.

Mr. Justice Sulzbacher did not sit at the hearing of this case.  