Correction of measurement via possessory information is allowed even when the land has no spring or forestRectificación de medida mediante información posesoria procede aunque no exista naciente ni bosque en el terreno

**I.-** The facts held as proven are endorsed, as they faithfully reflect what occurred in the case file, with the exception of the one identified with the letter e), given that it was demonstrated through the judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial) carried out for this purpose that no stream (quebrada) or springs (nacientes) exist. Of such nature, the following shall be taken as proven: J) the property is bounded on all boundaries (see inspections carried out, viewable on the CD added to the case file). k) On the land, there are two runoff water drainage ditches from the higher lands (see inspections carried out, added on CD to the case file; see Certificación de Uso Conforme de Suelos). l) There are no springs (nacientes) on the land to be titled (see inspections carried out, CD added to the case file).

**II.-** The facts held as not proven are not shared. The land is completely bounded with live and dead fences on all sides; furthermore, possession of the land for more than thirty years was demonstrated, and it was corroborated that there really is no spring (naciente) on the land (see inspections carried out, CD added to the case file).

**III.-** The petitioner appeals the decision issued by the court of origin, basically arguing that the a quo did not analyze the evidence existing in the case file, as it did not analyze the inspection (reconocimiento) carried out by Judge Wilbert Alvarez Li, where it can be seen that the farm is bounded, that there is no spring (naciente), and what the witnesses stated regarding the property being bounded. He says he does not share the reasoning presented by the a quo regarding the fact that witnesses [[Nombre1]] and [[Nombre2]] do not know the exact measurement of the land, as they are not surveyors to calculate exactly how much the land measures. Not even the judge who conducted the inspection (reconocimiento) knew how to calculate it, indicating it is a land of approximately two hectares, let alone two people whose only action is to testify about the possession exercised over the property, which belonged to their father, and they declare it is coffee and that it has been in the petitioner's possession for many years, and that they have no knowledge of anyone having claimed the land, indicating that in the community, the petitioner is known as the owner of the land. What they are certain of is that the land has belonged to him for many years and that it is fenced and cultivated with coffee. He argues he cannot lie regarding the existence of a spring (naciente) because in the video of the judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial) it can be seen that it does not exist. He alleges that in the video, it is not possible to demonstrate that the east area is unfenced, as the a quo stated in the decision. He says there is a certification from the Área de Conservación de la Cordillera Volcánica Central, where it is verified that there is no forest on the farm and it is not within reserves or national parks. He points out that it cannot be indicated that a stream (quebrada) and a spring (naciente) exist either, because that is not the case, and he will not come to lie in that sense, given that the proof that this is not so is in the case file. He states that if that were so, it would have been indicated in the Certificado de Uso conforme de Suelos, but it was not done because they do not exist. What is mentioned is the existence internally of natural drainage on the property. He states he does not understand how the judge ad quo indicates he did not protect the spring (naciente), if neither the A Y A nor the INTA verified the existence of any spring (naciente), nor did the surveying professionals.

**III.-** This matter concerns a measure correction (rectificación de medida) in accordance with the provisions of Article 14 of the Ley de Informaciones Posesorias, which establishes: "When it comes to correcting a measure, which means more than the aforementioned percentage, a possessory information (información posesoria) must be raised following the same procedures indicated in this law. Once the information is approved, the judge shall order that the corresponding entry be corrected in the Public Registry, without prejudice to any third party with a better right, and for this purpose, will issue a certification of the final decision once it is firm." Based on the foregoing, it is possible to correct the measure through the possessory information (información posesoria) procedure. However, such factual assumption on which the cited law was based, in the sense that certainty in the areas (cabidas) of the farms described in cadastral plans, with the passing of years, has been shown to still contain calculation errors in the measurements, due to multiple reasons. Hence, the fact that a property is described in a cadastral plan does not provide absolute certainty that the area (cabida) and location are exact. It is known that surveyors, when preparing plans, have different methods for doing so, and even different types of instruments and measurement criteria, which implies inaccuracies exist. In addition to this, until recently, the Instituto Geográfico Nacional began studies with modern satellite geographic location instruments to update all the country's cartographic sheets, as the existing ones contain location and measurement errors. It is important to know and set forth, in the following whereas clause, some historical data on cartography in Costa Rica, which began to consolidate in introductory form only until 1967, considering that by 1930, cartography in our country was in an incipient state.

**IV.-** BRIEF HISTORY OF CARTOGRAPHY IN COSTA RICA: The first map of Costa Rica is perhaps that of [[Nombre3]], chronicler and royal treasurer, who at the dawn of the 14th century presented the Gulf of Nicoya with its islands. This map served as the basis for many other works, which did not greatly improve on this initial image. It is not until 1850, in the map by [[Nombre4]], that it is improved, with the presentation of towns, mountains, rivers, and routes in the interior of the country, by taking new measurements. From the mid-19th century to its end, a large number of maps of Costa Rica were published, all very similar, some more so than others, with errors in the coastline, topography, and even spelling; among many authors we have: [[Nombre5]], [[Nombre6]]- , .- , . , . , [[Nombre7]], [[Nombre8]], [[Nombre9]], [[Nombre10]] and [[Nombre11]], [[Nombre12]], . , . , . and, [[Nombre13]]. . The maps that show Costa Rica with greater accuracy are those from the end of the century, among them those of [[Nombre14]] (1868), [[Nombre1]] (1876), [[Nombre15]] (1883), [[Nombre16]] (1889), [[Nombre17]] . (1892), [[Nombre18]] (1898) and that of [[Nombre19]] (1903), maps that do not differ in their outline from the current one. These latter maps gathered better conditions because measurements and positions had been intensified through astronomical observations, the direction of the mountains, the course of the rivers, and the main communication routes, the use of local and regional reports and maps which, by the end of the last century, were many; a method that left behind the surveying of the coasts from vessels, compass bearings, and some astronomical observations. The maps from the end of the century and the beginning of the present one benefited from the use of lithography, wax engraving, photoengraving, trichromy, and the variety and quality of inks and paper, as well as the appearance of technical observation equipment, which left the laborious drawing, individual reproduction, or the use, at least until 1830, of the copper engraving procedure—which consisted of engraving with a burin everything the map should contain onto a plate of this metal, this sheet was then correctly inked, pressed onto damp paper, thus obtaining the map—in oblivion. Another reason, the most important one, was the institutionalization of cartography in our country, through the creation of the Instituto Físico Geográfico, by decree XLII of June 11, 1889, which allowed the permanent development of this activity, strong from its genesis due to the work of its first Director, [[Nombre20]]. , and by his successors. Such is the case of Mr. [[Nombre18]], with the official map by Decree 91 of August 1, 1925, and the map of Mr. [[Nombre21]], in 1949. As the country grew in population, economy, and services, it became necessary to initiate profound work in cartography, to meet the needs demanded by future development, so that the Instituto Geográfico Nacional, since the middle of the last century, prepared for this task, in compliance with the mandate of its law of creation. In 1967, it managed to conclude the Mapa Básico de Costa Rica at a scale of 1:50,000, comprised of 133 sheets, each of them fifteen by ten minutes, to cover an approximate surface area of 504 km²." (Website of the Instituto Geográfico Nacional).- **V.-** Our current reality indicates there are registry inscriptions with areas (cabidas) that do not correspond to a material reality, and it is necessary that such coincidence between the physical reality of the property and the characteristics indicated in the registry be as exact as possible. In this same sense, efforts have been made to achieve this harmonization between both Institutions (Cadastre, Registry), which is why Law No. 8710 of February 3, 2009, was recently enacted, creating the Registro Inmobiliario, unifying both institutes, the reform to Article 2 of the Ley de Creación de Registro Nacional and Articles 1 and 39 of the Ley de Catastro Nacional, Ley de Catastro, and the Decretos Ejecutivos related to the creation of Zonas Catastrales.- **VI.** - In this particular case, the original farm originates in the year 1887, previously belonging to his grandfather, then to his father, and currently to the petitioner. This Chamber considers the appellant petitioner is correct, as the possession exercised by him directly for many years (more than twenty-five years) has been demonstrated. Furthermore, the property is outside any protected wilderness area, as shown in image 6 of the electronic file dated 01/18/2013, certification from the Ministerio del Ambiente y Energía. This Tribunal proceeded to conduct a judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial) on September 13, 2017, for the purpose of verifying the existence of springs (nacientes), streams (quebradas), and verifying if the land is bounded, as the correction was rejected on these points by the judge ad quo. This Tribunal was able to verify on-site that the land is completely bounded with live and barbed-wire fences on all sides: on the north side with three strands of wire, on the east side with two strands, on the south side with three strands of wire, and on the east side with four strands of wire on dead posts and live fences of poró and itabo. It also corroborated that there is no spring (naciente), nor any stream (quebrada) within the land to be titled. The existence of two natural rainwater runoff drainage channels was also verified, as the property to be titled is situated at the lower part of higher lands. The foregoing is consistent with what is stated in the soil conformity certification (certificado de uso conforme de suelos) by the Instituto Nacional de Innovación y Transferencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria of the Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, as verified in images 10 to 11 of the electronic file dated 08/16/12, where it is indicated that on the land there are two natural runoff water drainage channels. Likewise, in the judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial) conducted by Licentiate Wilberth Alvarez Li, he corroborated that there was no spring (naciente) whatsoever, nor any stream (quebrada), as can be seen in the video of the judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial) conducted by him on July 17, 2013, recorded on CD and added to the case file. Nor is it demonstrated from what is seen in it that the property is not bounded, as the judge ad quo concluded. By reason of the foregoing, this Tribunal proceeded to conduct a judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial), corroborating that the land is duly bounded on all its sides and that it has no spring (naciente) or stream (quebrada) whatsoever, corroborating that it has two natural runoff water drainage channels from the water coming from the higher properties, which means the appellant is correct in all his grievances. As is of interest for the resolution of this matter, Articles 12, 13, and 14, all of the Ley de Informaciones Posesorias, establish in that order: "Any error that needs to be corrected in a registered possessory title shall be processed in the same original file; and if this does not appear, a certification from the Public Registry of the respective entry shall be attached to the writing in which the correction is requested...", expressly indicating in the final paragraph: "Titles that are raised from now on cannot be corrected regarding the area (cabida) of the land for any reason, except when it involves correcting a calculation error in the plan, resulting from its own measurement details.", 13 "The area (cabida) of farms prior to October 23, 1930, or their segregations, may be corrected without the need for a file, with the mere declaration made by the owner in a public deed, increasing it up to the amount indicated by the plan, when the plan determines an area (cabida) that is not greater than 5,000 square meters, up to fifty percent of the area (cabida) in farms of more than five thousand meters and not more than five hectares, and not more than 30 hectares and up to ten percent of the area (cabida) in farms of more than 30 hectares...", with Article 14 providing that: "When it comes to correcting a measure, which means more than the aforementioned percentage, a possessory information (información posesoria) must be raised following the same procedures indicated in this law." Following the same line of thought set forth supra, Article 14 ibidem indicates that when correction cannot be made as indicated in Article 13, the correction shall proceed through judicial channels, so it could be understood that such numeral speaks of a notarial procedure for the cases described therein, while Article 14 ibidem is for all other cases, without making distinctions as to whether the farms were or were not registered before 1930 or considering the amount of meters to be corrected. Note that the judicial procedure to correct a measure is the same as that followed for the possessory information (información posesoria); the same requirements are demanded, such as the soil study, witnesses, certifications from the MINAET, notifications to adjacent landowners, the Procuraduría General de la República, the Instituto de Desarrollo Agrario, the exercise of possession that is public, peaceful, in the capacity of owner, and in good faith by the possessor, etc. Such judicial expenses are the same that would be incurred in the case of registering the strip of land as an independent farm in the Public Registry. Based on this, it is not possible to deny a measure correction (rectificación de medida) that meets exactly the same requirements as a possessory information (información posesoria), only for the interested party to then have to resort again to the possessory information (información posesoria) procedure, achieve the independent registration of said property, and then proceed to consolidate farms, as this violates the principle of procedural economy; besides causing the incurrence of excessive expenses of state resources, both judicial and registry, coupled with the human and economic resources of the user who requires prompt and effective justice (in this sense, see Voto Nº 274-F-09 of fifteen hours ten minutes of April twenty-fourth, two thousand nine). In the case at hand, it must be kept in mind that farm No. 21859-000, whose measure is intended to be corrected, was registered for the first time on November 28, 1887, and acquired by the petitioner on May 25, 1957, and it has not been the subject of correction, as established in the certification issued by the Registro Nacional visible in the Tray of ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS Main File, image 3. For the reasons set forth, the appealed judgment must be revoked, and in its place, the measure correction (rectificación de medida) must be approved. In the processing of these proceedings, all the requirements demanded by law have been met, and it was demonstrated that the title applicant has exercised possession in the terms indicated by Article 856 of the Código Civil, therefore, the present Measure Correction by Possessory Information is APPROVED, ordering the Registro Público de la Propiedad at once to correct the measure of the property registered in the Partido de San José under registration number [[Placa1]] - , in the name of [[Nombre22]], of legal age, divorced, resident of Alajuelita, with identification card CED1 - - .- The farm to be corrected is coffee-cultivated land located in San Antonio del [[Dirección1]] of the Province of San José.- It measures in material reality TWENTY-THREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED EIGHT SQUARE METERS. Its boundaries are: NORTH: [[Dirección2]] with a frontage to it of one hundred seventy-eight meters and fourteen linear decimeters, SOUTH: [[Nombre23]]; EAST: [[Nombre24]] and WEST: [[Nombre23]], according to CADASTRAL PLAN NUMBER SJ - ONE MILLION SIX HUNDRED ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY-FOUR - TWO THOUSAND TWELVE. The possessory acts have been coffee cultivation and it is currently dedicated to coffee.- The possession exercised has been in a quiet, public, and peaceful manner, in good faith, in the capacity of owner for more than thirty years in a personal capacity, according to the testimonies of witnesses [[Nombre1]], [[Nombre2]], and [[Nombre2]]; all residents of Alajuelita. The property to be titled was valued at the sum of three million two hundred sixty-three thousand colones and the present proceedings at the sum of two million colones. The cited property is free of liens, real encumbrances, and other co-owners, and its registration of measure correction (rectificación de medida) is made without prejudice to third parties with a better right.- Once this decision is firm, the corresponding certification shall be issued by the a-quo for its registration of measure correction (rectificación de medida) in the Registro Público de la Propiedad over Real Estate.

These latter maps were compiled under better conditions because they had intensified measurements and positions through astronomical observations, the direction of the mountains, the course of the rivers and the principal communication routes, the use of reports and local and regional maps which, by the end of the last century, were numerous; a method that left behind the surveying of the coasts from vessels, compass bearings and some astronomical observations. The maps from the end of the century and the beginning of the present one benefited from the use of lithography, wax engraving, photoengraving, three-color printing, and the variety and quality of inks and paper, as well as the appearance of technical observation equipment, which came to render obsolete the laborious drawing, individual reproduction or the use, at least until 1830, of the copper engraving procedure, which consisted of engraving with a burin on a plate of this metal everything the map was to contain; this sheet was then properly inked and pressed onto damp paper, thus obtaining the map. Another reason, the most important, was the institutionalization of cartography in our country, through the creation of the Instituto Físico Geográfico, by decree XLII of June 11, 1889, which allowed the permanent development of this activity, strong from its genesis due to the work of its first Director, [Nombre20], and by his successors. Such is the case of Mr. [[Nombre18]], with the official map by Decree 91 of August 1, 1925, and the map of Mr. [[Nombre21]], in 1949. As the country grew in population, economy and services, it became necessary to begin a profound cartographic effort, to meet the needs demanded by future development, so that the Instituto Geográfico Nacional, since the middle of the last century prepared for this task, in compliance with the mandate of its creation law. In 1967 it managed to complete the Mapa Básico de Costa Rica at a scale of 1:50,000, consisting of 133 sheets, each measuring fifteen by ten minutes, covering an approximate area of 504 square kilometers (504 Km2). (Website of the Instituto Geográfico Nacional).

**V.-** Our current reality indicates that there are registry inscriptions with areas that do not correspond to a material reality, and it is necessary that such coincidence between the physical reality of the property and the characteristics indicated in the registry be exact as far as possible. In this same vein, efforts have been made to achieve this harmonization between both Institutions (Catastro, Registro), which is why Law No. 8710 of February 3, 2009 was recently enacted, creating the Registro Inmobiliario unifying both institutes, the reform to Article 2 of the Ley de Creación de Registro Nacional and Articles 1 and 39 of the Ley de Catastro Nacional, Ley de Catastro and the Decretos Ejecutivos referring to the creation of Zonas Catastrales.

**VI. -** In this particular case the original farm originated in the year 1887, having previously belonged to his grandfather, then his father, and currently to the applicant. This Chamber considers the applicant appellant is correct because it has been possible to demonstrate the possession exercised by him directly for many years (more than twenty-five years). Furthermore, the property is outside any protected wild area as shown in image 6 of the electronic file dated 18/01/2013, a certification from the Ministerio del Ambiente y Energía. This Tribunal proceeded to conduct a judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial) on September 13, 2017, with the purpose of verifying the existence of springs (nacientes), streams (quebradas), and checking whether the land is bounded (deslindado), since the rectification had been rejected on these points by the judge a quo. This Tribunal was able to verify on site that the land is completely bounded with live fences and barbed wire on all sides: on the north sector with three strands of wire, on the east sector with two strands, on the south sector with three strands of wire, and on the east sector with four strands of wire on dead posts and live fences of poró and itabo. It also corroborated that there is no spring (naciente) whatsoever, nor any stream (quebrada) within the land to be titled. It was also possible to verify the existence of two natural rainwater runoff drainage channels (desagues naturales de aguas llovidas por escorrentía) as the farm to be titled is located on the lower part of higher ground. The foregoing agrees with what is stated in the certificate of compliant land use (certificado de uso conforme de suelos) from the Instituto Nacional de Innovación y Transferencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria of the Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, as verified in images 10 to 11 of the electronic file dated 16/08/12, in which it is indicated that there are two natural runoff water drainage channels on the land. Likewise, in the judicial inspection conducted by Lic. Wilberth Alvarez Li, he corroborated that there was no spring, nor any stream, as can be seen in the video of the judicial inspection conducted by him on July 17, 2013, contained on a CD and added to the expediente. Nor is it demonstrated from what is seen therein that the property is not bounded, as concluded by the judge a quo. Because of the foregoing, this Tribunal proceeded to conduct a judicial inspection, corroborating that the land is duly bounded on all its sides and that it has no spring, nor any stream, corroborating that it has two pipes of natural drainage for runoff water coming from the higher farms, which means the appellant is correct in all his grievances.

In what is of interest for the resolution of this matter, Articles 12, 13 and 14, all of the Ley de Informaciones Posesorias, establish in that order: "Any error that it is necessary to rectify in an inscribed possessory title, shall be processed in the same original expediente; and if this does not appear, a certification from the Registro Público of the respective entry shall be attached to the "...writ ...in which the rectification is requested...", expressly stating the final paragraph: "Titles that are henceforth issued, may not be rectified as to area (cabida) of the land for any reason, unless it is a matter of correcting a calculation error in the plan, resulting from its same measurement details.", 13 "The area (cabida) of farms prior to October 23, 1930, or their segregations, may be rectified without need of an expediente, with the sole declaration made by the owner in public deed, increasing it up to the quantity indicated by the plan, when this determines an area not greater than 5,000 square meters, up to fifty percent of the area on farms of more than five thousand meters and no larger than five hectares and no larger than 30 hectares, and up to ten percent of the area on farms of more than 30 hectares...", Article 14 stating that: "When it is a matter of rectifying a measurement, that signifies more than the percentage indicated above, a possessory information (información posesoria) must be conducted following the same procedures indicated in this law." Following the same line of thought set forth supra, Article 14 ibidem indicates that when a measurement cannot be rectified as indicated by Article 13, one shall proceed with the rectification by judicial means, so it could be understood that said numeral speaks of a notarial procedure for the assumptions described therein, while ordinal 14 ibidem is for all other cases without entering into distinctions as to whether the farms were or were not inscribed before 1930 or considering the quantity of meters to be rectified. Note that the judicial procedure to rectify measurement is the same followed for the possessory information (información posesoria), requiring the same requisites, such as the soil study, witnesses, certifications from MINAET, notifications to adjoining owners, the Procuraduría General de la República, the Instituto de Desarrollo Agrario, the exercise of possession (posesión) that is public, peaceful, as owner, and in good faith by the possessor, etc. Such judicial expenses are the same as would be incurred in the case of inscribing the strip of land as an independent farm in the Registro Público. On that basis, it is not possible to deny a rectification of measurement that meets exactly the same requirements as a possessory information (información posesoria), only to then have the interested party have to resort again to the possessory information proceeding, achieve the independent inscription of said property, and then proceed to join the farms, which violates the principle of procedural economy; besides causing excessive expenditure of state resources, both judicial and registry, together with the human and economic resources of the user who requires prompt and complete justice (in this regard, see vote Nº 274-F-09 of fifteen hours ten minutes of April twenty-fourth, two thousand nine). In the instant case, one must bear in mind that the farm Nº 21859-000, whose measurement is sought to be rectified, was first inscribed on November 28, 1887, acquired by the applicant on May 25, 1957, and has not been the subject of rectification as established by the certification issued by the Registro Nacional visible in the Tray of ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS Main File image 3.

Based on the foregoing, the appealed judgment must be reversed and in its place proceed to approve the rectification of measurement.

In the processing of these proceedings all requirements demanded by law have been met and it was demonstrated that the title holder has exercised possession (posesión) in the terms indicated by Article 856 of the Código Civil, therefore this Rectification of Measurement by Possessory Information (Rectificación de Medida por Información Posesoria) is APPROVED, ordering the Registro Público de la Propiedad at once to rectify the measurement of the property inscribed in the Partido de San José under registration number [[Placa1]] -, in the name of [[Nombre22]], of legal age, divorced, resident of Alajuelita, with identification number CED1 --.- The farm to be rectified is land cultivated with coffee located in San Antonio del [[Dirección1]] of the Province of San José.- It measures in material reality TWENTY-THREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED EIGHT SQUARE METERS.

Its boundaries (linderos) are: NORTH: [[Dirección2]] with a frontage to this of one hundred seventy-eight meters and fourteen linear decimeters, SOUTH: [[Nombre23]]; EAST: [[Nombre24]] and to the WEST: [[Nombre23]], according to CATASTER PLAN NUMBER SJ - ONE MILLION SIX HUNDRED ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY-FOUR - TWO THOUSAND TWELVE. The possessory acts have been cultivation of coffee and it is currently dedicated to coffee.- The possession (posesión) exercised has been in a quiet, public and peaceful manner, in good faith, as owner for more than thirty years personally according to the declarations of witnesses [[Nombre1]], [[Nombre2]] and [[Nombre2]]; all residents of Alajuelita. The property to be titled was appraised at the sum of three million two hundred sixty-three thousand colones and the present proceedings at the sum of two million colones. The cited property is free of liens, real charges and other co-owners, and its rectification of measurement inscription is made without prejudice to third parties with a better right.- Once this ruling is final, let the corresponding certification be issued by the a-quo, for its inscription of rectification of measurement in the Registro Público de la Propiedad sobre Bienes Inmuebles." It is important to know and set forth in the following considerando some historical facts about cartography in Costa Rica, which began to consolidate in an introductory manner only until 1967, given that in the year 1930, cartography in our country was in an incipient stage.

**IV.-** BRIEF HISTORY OF CARTOGRAPHY IN COSTA RICA: The first map of Costa Rica is perhaps that of [[Nombre3]], chronicler and royal treasurer, who at the dawn of the 14th century presented the Gulf of Nicoya with its islands. This map served as the basis for many other works, which did not greatly improve upon this initial image. It was not until 1850, in the map by [[Nombre4]], that it was improved, with the presentation of towns, mountains, rivers, and inland routes of the country, by taking new measurements. From the mid-19th century to its end, a large number of maps of Costa Rica were published, all of them very similar, some more than others, with errors in the coastline, in the topography, and even in the spelling; among many authors we have: [[Nombre5]], [[Nombre6]], [[Nombre7]], [[Nombre8]], [[Nombre9]], [[Nombre10]] and [[Nombre11]], [[Nombre12]], and, [[Nombre13]]. The maps that come to show Costa Rica with greater accuracy are those from the end of the century, among them those by [[Nombre14]] (1868), [[Nombre1]] (1876), [[Nombre15]] (1883), [[Nombre16]] (1889), [[Nombre17]] (1892), [[Nombre18]] (1898) and that of [[Nombre19]] (1903), maps that do not differ in their outline from the current one. These latter maps met better conditions because they had intensified measurements and positions by means of astronomical observations, the direction of the mountains, the course of the rivers and the main communication routes, the use of reports and local and regional maps, of which there were many by the end of the last century; a method that left behind the surveying of the coasts from vessels, compass bearings, and some astronomical observations. The maps from the end of the century and the beginning of the present one were benefited by the use of lithography, wax engraving, photoengraving, three-color printing, and the variety and quality of inks and paper, as well as the appearance of technical observation equipment, which came to consign the laborious individual drawing reproduction to oblivion, or the use, at least until 1830, of the copper engraving procedure, which consisted of engraving with a burin on a plate of this metal everything the map was to contain; this sheet was then correctly inked and pressed onto damp paper, thus obtaining the map. Another reason, the most important, was the institutionalization of cartography in our country, through the creation of the Instituto Físico Geográfico, decree XLII of June 11, 1889, which allowed the permanent development of this activity, strong from its genesis due to the work of its first Director, [Nombre20], and his successors. Such is the case of Mr. [[Nombre18]], with the official map by Decree 91 of August 1, 1925, and the map of Mr. [[Nombre21]], in 1949. As the country grew in population, economy, and services, it became necessary to begin a profound cartographic work to meet the needs demanded by future development, so that the Instituto Geográfico Nacional, since the middle of the last century, prepared for this task, in compliance with the mandate of its founding law. In the year 1967, it managed to conclude the Mapa Básico de Costa Rica at a scale of 1:50,000, comprised of 133 sheets, each one measuring fifteen by ten minutes, covering an approximate area of 504 km². (Website of the Instituto Geográfico Nacional).- **V.-** Our current reality indicates that there are registry inscriptions with areas that do not correspond to a material reality, and it is necessary that such coincidence between the physical reality of the property and the characteristics indicated in the registry be exact as far as possible. In this same sense, efforts have been made to achieve that harmonization between both Institutions (Cadastre, Registry), for which Law number 8710 of February 3, 2009, was recently enacted, which creates the Registro Inmobiliario, unifying both institutes, reforming Article 2 of the Law Creating the National Registry and Articles 1 and 39 of the National Cadastre Law, the Cadastre Law, and the Decretos Ejecutivos referring to the creation of Zonas Catastrales.- **VI.-** In this particular case, the original farm originates in the year 1887, having previously belonged to his grandfather, then to his father, and currently to the petitioner. This Chamber considers that the appellant petitioner is correct, inasmuch as it has been possible to demonstrate the possession exercised by him directly for many years (more than twenty-five years). Furthermore, the property is outside any protected wilderness area, as shown in image 6 of the electronic file dated 01/18/2013, certification from the Ministerio del Ambiente y Energía. This Court proceeded to conduct a judicial inspection on September 13, 2017, for the purpose of verifying the existence of springs (nacientes), streams, and verifying whether the land is demarcated, given that the a quo judge rejected the rectification on those grounds. This Court was able to verify on site that the land is totally demarcated with living fences and barbed wire on all sides: on the north side with three strands of wire, on the east side with two strands, on the south side with three strands of wire, and on the east side with four strands of wire on dead posts and living fences of poró and itabo. It also corroborated that there is no spring (naciente), nor any stream within the land to be titled. It was also possible to verify the existence of two natural drains for rainwater runoff, as the property to be titled is located below higher lands. The foregoing agrees with what is stated in the certificate of compliant land use (uso conforme de suelos) by the Instituto Nacional de Innovación y Transferencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria of the Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, as verified in images 10 to 11 of the electronic file dated 08/16/12, in which it is indicated that on the land there are two natural drains for runoff water. Likewise, in the judicial inspection conducted by Licentiate Wilberth Alvarez Li, he corroborated that there was no spring (naciente), nor any stream, as can be seen in the video of the judicial inspection conducted by him on July 17, 2013, contained on a CD and added to the file. Nor is it demonstrated from what was seen therein that the property is not demarcated, as the a quo judge concluded. By reason of the foregoing, this Court proceeded to conduct a judicial inspection, corroborating that the land is duly demarcated on all its sides and that it has no spring (naciente), nor any stream, corroborating that it has two channels as natural drains for the runoff water coming from the higher properties, which means the appellant is correct in all his grievances.

In what is of interest for the resolution of this matter, Articles 12, 13, and 14, all of the Ley de Informaciones Posesorias, establish in that order: "Any error that needs to be rectified in a registered possessory title shall be processed in the same original file; and if the latter does not appear, a certification from the Public Registry of the respective entry shall be attached to the ... brief ... in which the rectification is requested...", expressly stating in the final paragraph: "Titles that are raised henceforth may not be rectified as to the area (cabida) of the land for any reason, unless it is a matter of correcting a calculation error in the plan, resulting from its same measurement details."; 13 "The area (cabida) of the farms predating October 23, 1930, or their segregations, may be rectified without the need for a file, with the sole declaration made by the owner in a public deed, increasing it up to the amount indicated by the plan, when the latter determines an area that is not more than 5,000 square meters, up to fifty percent of the area in farms of more than five thousand meters and not more than five hectares, and not more than 30 hectares, and up to ten percent of the area in farms of more than 30 hectares...", with Article 14 providing that: "When the matter involves rectifying a measurement that means more than the aforementioned percentage, a possessory information (información posesoria) must be raised following the same procedures indicated in this law." Following the same line of thought set forth above, Article 14 ibidem indicates that when a rectification cannot be made as indicated in Article 13, the rectification shall proceed through judicial channels, so it could be understood that said article refers to a notarial procedure for the cases described therein, while Article 14 ibidem applies to all other cases without making distinctions as to whether the farms were or were not registered before 1930, or considering the amount of meters to be rectified. Note that the judicial procedure to rectify a measurement is the same one followed for the possessory information (información posesoria); the same requirements are demanded, such as soil study, witnesses, certifications from MINAET, notifications to adjoining landowners, the Procuraduría General de la República, the Instituto de Desarrollo Agrario, the exercise of possession that is public, peaceful, as owner and in good faith by the possessor, etc. Such judicial expenses are the same as would be incurred in the case of registering the strip of land as an independent farm in the Public Registry. Based on that, it is not possible to deny a measurement rectification that meets exactly the same requirements as a possessory information (información posesoria), only for the interested party to then have to resort again to the possessory information process, achieve the independent registration of said property, and then proceed to consolidate farms (reunión de fincas); this violates the principle of procedural economy; besides causing excessive expenses of state resources, both judicial and registry, coupled with the human and economic resources of the user who requires prompt and effective justice (in this sense, see vote No. 274-F-09 of fifteen hours ten minutes of April twenty-four, two thousand nine). In the instant case, it must be kept in mind that farm No. **21859-000**, whose measurement is sought to be rectified, was first registered on November 28, 1887, and acquired by the petitioner on May 25, 1957, and has not been subject to rectification as established by the certification issued by the National Registry, visible in the ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS Tray Main File image 3.

For the reasons stated, the appealed judgment must be revoked, and in its place, the measurement rectification must be approved.

In the processing of these proceedings, all requirements demanded by law have been met, and it was demonstrated that the title holder has exercised possession under the terms indicated by Article 856 of the Civil Code, whereby this Measurement Rectification by Possessory Information (Rectificación de Medida por Información Posesoria) is APPROVED, ordering the Public Property Registry at once to rectify the measurement of the property registered in the San José District under registration number [[Placa1]] -, in the name of [[Nombre22]], of legal age, divorced, resident of Alajuelita, with identification number CED1 - -.- The farm to be rectified is land cultivated with coffee located in San Antonio of [[Dirección1]] of the Province of San José.- It measures in material reality TWENTY-THREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED EIGHT SQUARE METERS. Its boundaries are: NORTH: [[Dirección2]] with a frontage to it of one hundred seventy-eight meters and fourteen linear decimeters; SOUTH: [[Nombre23]] ; EAST: [[Nombre24]] ; and WEST: [[Nombre23]] , according to CADASTRAL PLAN NUMBER SJ - ONE MILLION SIX HUNDRED ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY-FOUR - TWO THOUSAND TWELVE. The possessory acts have been cultivation of coffee and it is currently dedicated to coffee.- The possession exercised has been in a quiet, public, and peaceful manner, in good faith, as owner for more than thirty years personally, according to the statements of the witnesses [[Nombre1]], [[Nombre2]] and [[Nombre2]]; all residents of Alajuelita. The property to be titled was valued at the sum of three million two hundred sixty-three thousand colones and these proceedings at the sum of two million colones. The cited property is free of encumbrances, real charges, and other co-owners, and its registration of measurement rectification is made without prejudice to third parties with better rights.- Once this resolution is final, let the corresponding certification be issued by the a-quo judge for its registration of measurement rectification in the Public Property Registry of Real Property."

“ I.- Se prohijan los hechos tenidos por demostrados al ser fiel reflejo de lo acaecido en autos con excepción del identificado con la letra e), al demostrarse con el reconocimiento judicial practicado al efecto no existe quebrada alguna ni nacientes. De dicha naturaleza téngase los siguientes: J) el bien está deslindado por todos los linderos (ver reconocimientos practicados visibles en CD agregados al expediente). k) En el terreno existen dos zanjas de desagüe de aguas de escorrentía de los terrenos superiores (ver reconocimientos practicados agregados en CD al expediente, ver Certificación de Uso Conforme de Suelos). l) No hay nacientes sobre el terreno a titular (ver reconocimientos practicados, CD agregados al expediente).

II.- No se comparten los hechos tenidos por no demostrados. El terreno está totalmente deslindado con cercas vivas y muertas por todos los costados, además se logró demostrar la posesión del terreno desde hace más de treinta años y se corroboró realmente no existe ninguna naciente sobre el terreno (ver reconocimientos practicados, CD agregados al expediente).

III.- El promovente apela la resolución dictada por el juzgado de origen básicamente alegando, el a quo no hizo un análisis de la prueba existente en el expediente por cuanto no analiza el reconocimiento practicado por el juez Wilbert Alvarez Li, donde se puede apreciar la finca está deslindada, que no hay naciente y lo dicho por los testigos respecto a que el mueble está deslindado. Dice no comparte el fundamento expuesto por el a quo en cuanto a que las testigos [[Nombre1]] y [[Nombre2]] no conocen la medida exacta del terreno por cuanto ellas no son topógrafas para calcular cuanto mide el terreno exactamente. Ni el mismo juez que hizo el reconocimiento supo calcularlo al indicar es un terreno de aproximadamente dos hectáreas, menos dos personas que lo único que hacen es declarar sobre la posesión ejercida sobre el inmueble, el cual fue de su padre y declaran que es de acfé y que ha estado en la posesión del promovente desde hace muchos años y que no tienen noticia sobre si alguien ha reclamado el terreno, indicando en la comunidad conocen al promovente como el propietario del terreno. Lo que si les consta es que el terreno le ha pertenecido desde hace muchos años y que se encuentra cercado y cultivado de café. Aduce, no puede mentir en cuanto a la existencia de una naciente por cuanto en el video del reconocimiento judicial se aprecia no existe la misma. Alega que en el video no se logra demostrar el área este sin cercar como lo dice el a quo en la resolución. Dice existe certificación del Área de Conservación de la Cordillera Volcánica Central donde se constata no existe bosque en la finca y no se encuentra dentro de reservas o parques nacionales. Señala tampoco puede indicar existe una quebrada y una naciente por cuanto ellos no es así, y no va a venir a mentir en dicho sentido dado en el expediente está la prueba de que ello no es así. manifiesta si ello fuera así en el Certificado de Uso conforme de Suelos ello se hubiese indicado, pero no se hizo porque no existen. Lo que si se menciona es la existencia internamente de drenajes naturales en el fundo. Manifiesta no entiende como el juez ad quo indica no protegió la naciente, si ni el A Y A, ni el INTA comprobaron la existencia de alguna naciente, así como tampoco los profesionales de topografía.

III.- Este asunto trata sobre una rectificación de medida conforme a lo dispuesto por el ordinal 14 de la Ley de Informaciones Posesorias el cual establece: " Cuando se tratare de rectificar una medida, que signifique más del porcentaje antes señalado, deberá levantarse una información posesoria siguiendo los mismos trámites señalados en esta ley. Aprobada la información, el juez ordenará que se haga en el registro Público la rectificación del asiento correspondiente, sin perjuicio de tercero de mejor derecho y, con ese objeto extenderá certificación de la resolución una vez firme.". Partiendo de lo anterior es dable rectificar la medida mediante el tramite de información posesoria. Sin embargo, tal supuesto fáctico en el que se basó la ley de cita en el sentido de que la certeza en las cabidas de las fincas descritas en planos catastrado, con el devenir de los años, se ha demostrado siguen existiendo errores de cálculo en las medidas, ello debido a múltiples razones. De allí el hecho que una propiedad sea descrita en un plano catastrado no hay certeza absoluta de que la cabida y ubicación sea de manera exacta. Es sabido que los topógrafos al confeccionar los planos tienen diferentes métodos para ello, e incluso diferentes tipos de instrumentos y criterios de medida, lo que implica hayan inexactitudes. Aunado a ello, hasta hace poco el Instituto Geográfico Nacional inició estudios con instrumentos modernos de ubicación geográfica por satélite para actualizar todas las hojas cartográficas del país, pues las ya existentes contienen errores de ubicación y medidas. Es importante, conocer y exponer en el siguiente considerando, algunos datos históricos de la cartografía en Costa Rica, la cuál se empieza a consolidar en forma introductoria hasta 1967, siendo que para el año 1930, la cartografía en nuestro país era de manera incipiente.

IV.- BREVE HISTORIA DE LA CARTOGRAFIA EN COSTA RICA: El primer mapa de Costa Rica, quizás sea el de [[Nombre3]] , cronista y tesorero real, quien en los albores del siglo XIV presenta el golfo de Nicoya con sus islas. Este mapa sirvió de base para muchas otras obras más, las cuales no mejoraron en mucho esta imagen inicial. Es hasta 1850, en el mapa [[Nombre4]]. , en que es mejorada, con la presentación de pueblos, montañas, ríos, y vías del interior del país, al realizar nuevas medidas. De mediados del siglo XIX hasta su final, una gran cantidad de mapas de Costa Rica, fueron publicados, todos ellos muy similares, unos más que otros, con errores en la línea de costa, en la topografía y hasta en la ortografía; entre muchos autores tenemos: [[Nombre5]], [[Nombre6]]- , .- , . , . , [[Nombre7]], [[Nombre8]], [[Nombre9]], [[Nombre10]] y [[Nombre11]], [[Nombre12]], . , . , . y, [[Nombre13]]. . Los mapas que vienen a mostrar a Costa Rica con mayor exactitud son los de finales de siglo, entre ellos los de [[Nombre14]] (1868), [[Nombre1]] (1876), [[Nombre15]] (1883), [[Nombre16]] (1889), [[Nombre17]] . (1892), [[Nombre18]] (1898) y el de [[Nombre19]] (1903), mapas que no difieren en su contorno con el actual. Estos últimos mapas reunían mejores condiciones porque habían intensificado medidas y posiciones por medio de observaciones astronómicas, la dirección de las montañas, el curso de los ríos y las principales vías de comunicación, el uso de informes y mapas locales y regionales que para finales del siglo pasado eran muchos; método que dejaba atrás al levantado de las costas desde embarcaciones , rumbos de brújulas y algunas observaciones astronómicas. Los mapas de finales de siglo y principios del presente fueron beneficiados por el uso de la litografía, el grabado en cera, el fotograbado, la tricomía y la variedad y calidad de tintas y papel, como la aparición de equipo técnico de observación, lo que vino a dejar en el olvido el laborioso dibujo. reproducción individual o el uso, por lo menos hasta 1830, del procedimiento del grabado en cobre, que consistía en grabar con un buril una plancha de este metal todo lo que el mapa debía contener, esta lámina luego era entintada correctamente, comprimirla sobre papel húmedo, obteniendo de esta manera el mapa. Otra razón, la más importante, fue la institucionalización de la cartografía en nuestro país, mediante la creación del Instituto Físico Geográfico, decreto XLII del 11 de Junio de 1889, que permitió el desarrollo permanente de esta actividad, fuerte desde su génesis por la labor de su primer Director, [Nombre20]. , y por sus sucesores. Tal es el caso de don [[Nombre18]] , con el mapa oficial por el Decreto 91 del 1 de Agosto de 1925, y el mapa de don [[Nombre21]] , en 1949. A medida que el país fue creciendo en población, economía y servicios, fue necesario el iniciar una labor profunda en cartografía, para atender las necesidades que demandaba el desarrollo futuro, de manera que, el Instituto Geográfico Nacional, desde mediados del siglo pasado se preparó para esta tarea, en atención al mandato de su ley de creación. En el año de 1967 logra concluir el Mapa Básico de Costa Rica a escala 1:50 000, conformado por 133 hojas, cada una de ellas quince por diez minutos, para cubrir una superficie aproximada de 504 Km2". (Página web del Instituto Geográfico Nacional).- V.- Nuestra realidad actual, indica existen inscripciones registrales con cabidas que no corresponden una realidad material, y es necesario tal coincidencia entre la realidad física del inmueble y las características que se indican en el registro sea exacta en la medida de lo posible. En este mismo sentido, se han hecho esfuerzos para lograr esa armonización entre ambas Instituciones (Catastro, Registro), por lo que recientemente se promulgó mediante ley número 8710 del 3 de febrero del 2009, la cual crea el Registro Inmobiliario unificando ambos institutos, la reforma al artículo 2 de la Ley de Creación de Registro Nacional y artículos 1 y 39 de la Ley de Catastro Nacional, Ley de Catastro y los Decretos Ejecutivos referidos a la creación de Zonas Catastrales.- VI. - En este caso particular la finca original nace en el año de 1887, siendo anteriormente de su abuelo, luego de su padre y actualmente del promovente. Considera esta Cámara lleva razón el promovente apelante por cuanto se ha logrado demostrar la posesión ejercida por él directamente desde hace muchos años ( más de veinticinco años). Además, el inmueble está fuera de cualquier área silvestre protegida según se tiene en imagen 6 del archivo electrónico de fecha 18/01/2013, certificación del Ministerio del Ambiente y Energía. Este Tribunal procedió a practicar un reconocimiento judicial el día 13 de setiembre de 2017, con la finalidad de comprobar la existencia de nacientes, quebradas y verificar si el terreno se encuentra deslindado al haberse rechazado por tales puntos la rectificación por el juez ad quo. Este Tribunal logró comprobar en el sitio que el terreno está totalmente deslindado con cercas vivas y alambres de púas por todos los costados, por el sector norte a tres hilos de alambre, por el sector este a dos hilos, por el sector sur a tres hilos de alambre y por el sector este a cuatro hilos de alambres sobre postes muertos y cercas vivas de poró e itabo. También corroboró no existe ninguna naciente, ni tampoco quebrada alguna dentro del terreno a titular. también se pudo comprobar la existencia de dos desagues naturales de aguas llovidas por escorrentía al estar el fundo a titular situado en la parte de abajo de terrenos más elevados. Lo anterior concuerda con lo dicho en el certificado de uso conforme de suelos por el Instituto Nacional de Innovación y Transferencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria del Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería según se constata en imagen 10 a 11 del archivo electrónico de fecha 16/08/12, en el cual se indica en el terreno existen dos desagues naturales de aguas por escorrentía. Igualmente en el reconocimiento judicial practicado por el licenciado Wilberth Alvarez Li, este corroboró no existía naciente alguna, así como tampoco quebrada alguna según se puede apreciar en el video del reconocimiento judicial practicado por este, el día 17 de julio de 2013, constante en cd y agregado al expediente. Tampoco se demuestra de lo visto en el mismo la propiedad no este deslindada, tal y como concluyó el juez ad quo. En razón de lo anterior este Tribunal procedió a realizar reconocimiento judicial corroborando el terreno está debidamente deslindado por todos sus costados y que no tiene ninguna naciente, ni quebrada alguna, corroborando tiene dos caños de desagues naturales de las aguas de escorrentía que provienen de los fundos superiores, lo que hace lleve razón el apelante en todos sus agravios. En lo que es de interés para la solución de este asunto, establecen en ese orden, los artículos 12, 13 y 14 todos de la Ley de Informaciones Posesorias: "Cualquier error que sea necesario rectificar en un título posesorio inscrito, se tramitará en el mismo expediente original; y si éste no apareciere, se acompañará al "...escrito ...en que se pida la rectificación, una certificación del Registro Público del asiento respectivo...", expresamente señalando el párrafo final: "Los títulos que en adelante se levanten, no podrán ser rectificados en cuanto a cabida del terreno por ningún motivo, salvo que se tratare de enmendar un error de cálculo de plano, resultante de sus mismos detalles de medida."., 13 "La cabida de las fincas con anterioridad al 23 de octubre de 1930, o sus segregaciones, podrá ser rectificada sin necesidad de expediente, con la sola declaración hecha por el propietario en escritura pública, aumentándola hasta la cantidad que indique el plano, cuando éste determina una cabida que no sea mayor a 5.000 metros cuadrados, hasta un cincuenta por ciento de la cabida en las fincas de más de cinco mil metros y no mayores de cinco hectáreas y no mayores de 30 hectáreas y hasta un diez por ciento de la cabida en las fincas de más de 30 hectáreas...", disponiéndose en el artículo 14 que: "Cuando se tratare de rectificar una medida, que signifique más del porcentaje antes señalado, deberá levantarse una información posesoria siguiendo los mismos trámites señalados en esta ley." . Siguiendo el mismo orden de ideas expuesto supra, el artículo 14 ibídem, indica cuando no se pueda rectificar como lo indica el artículo 13, se procederá a la rectificación por vía judicial, por lo que podría entenderse dicho numeral habla de un procedimiento notarial para los supuestos allí descritos, mientras que el ordinal 14 ibídem lo es para todos los demás casos sin entrar en distinciones de si las fincas fueron o no inscritas antes de 1930 o considerando la cantidad de metros a rectificar. Nótese el procedimiento judicial para rectificar medida es el mismo seguido para la información posesoria, se exigen los mismos requisitos, como el estudio de suelos, testigos, certificaciones del MINAET, notificaciones a colindantes, Procuraduría General de la República, al Instituto de Desarrollo Agrario, el ejercicio de una posesión, pública, pacífica, a título de dueño y de buena fe al poseedor, etc. Tales gastos judiciales son los mismos en que se incurriría en el caso de inscribir la franja de terreno como finca independiente en el Registro Público. Partiendo de ello, no es posible denegar una rectificación de medida que cumple exactamente los mismos requisitos de una información posesoria, para luego, tener el interesado que acudir otra vez al trámite de información posesoria, lograr la inscripción independiente de dicho inmueble para luego proceder a hacer reunión de fincas, ello atenta con el principio de economía procesal; amen de hacer incurrir en gastos excesivos de recursos estatales, tanto judiciales como registrales, aunado a los recursos humanos y económicos del usuario quien requiere de una justicia pronta y cumplida, (en dicho sentido véase voto Nº 274-F-09 de las quince horas diez minutos del veinticuatro de abril de dos mil nueve). En el caso de marras, hay que tener presente la finca finca Nº 21859-000, pretendida se le rectifique su medida fue inscrita por primera vez el 28 de noviembre de 1887 y adquirida por el promovente el 25 de mayo de 1957 y no ha sido objeto de rectificación según lo establece la certificación expedida por el Registro Nacional visible en la Bandeja de DOCUMENTOS ASOCIADOS Expediente Principal imagen 3. Por lo expuesto, ha de revocarse la sentencia impugnada y en su lugar proceder a aprobar la rectificación de medida. En la tramitación de estas diligencias se han cumplido todos los requisitos exigidos por ley y fue demostrado que el titulante ha ejercido posesión en los términos que indica el artículo 856 del Código Civil, por lo cual se APRUEBA la presente Rectificación de Medida por Información Posesoria ordenándose de una vez al Registro Público de la Propiedad rectificar la medida del inmueble inscrito en el Partido de San José bajo matrícula [[Placa1]] - , a nombre de [[Nombre22]] , mayor, divorciado, vecino de Alajuelita, con cédula CED1 - - .- La finca a rectificar es terreno cultivado de café situado en San Antonio del [[Dirección1]] de la Provincia de San José.- Mide en la realidad material VEINTITRES MIL NOVECIENTOS OCHO METROS CUADRADOS. Sus linderos son: NORTE: [[Dirección2]] con un frente a esta de ciento setenta y ocho metros con catorce decímetros lineales, SUR: [[Nombre23]] ; ESTE: [[Nombre24]] y al OESTE: [[Nombre23]] , según PLANO CATASTRADO NUMERO SJ - UN MILLÓN SEISCIENTOS UN MIL SETECIENTOS OCHENTA Y CUATRO - DOS MIL DOCE. Los actos posesorios han cultivo de café y actualmente está dedicado a café.- La posesión ejercida ha sido en forma quieta, pública y pacífica, de buena fe, a título de dueño por más de treinta años a título personal según declaraciones de los testigos [[Nombre1]] , [[Nombre2]] y [[Nombre2]] ; todos vecinos de Alajuelita. Fue estimado el inmueble a titular en la suma de tres millones doscientos sesenta y tres mil colones y las presentes diligencias en la la suma de dos millones de colones. El citado inmueble se encuentra libre de gravámenes, cargas reales y otros condueños, y su inscripción de rectificación de medida se hace sin perjuicio de terceros de mejor derecho.- Firme esta resolución extiéndase la certificación correspondiente por parte del a-quo, para su inscripción de rectificación de medida en el Registro Público de la Propiedad sobre Bienes Inmuebles.”