Andriel Gayle P.

Yulo

Gomez v. CA case digest

Facts: Petitioners are the heirs of Consolacion M. Gomez. They applied for the registration of several
parcels of land. The court adjudged the lots in favor of the petitioners and after the finality of the
decision instructed the chief of the general land registration office to issue the decrees of
registration for the petitioners’ lots. However, the chief saw that the lots of the petitioners were
already covered by homestead patents, and so the chief submitted a report to the court a quo
declaring such and issued a recommendation to set the order aside. Petitioners opposed the action
of the chief of the general land registration office and the appellate court’s decision disallow the lots
covered by homestead patents could not be subject for another registration.

Issues:

a.) Whether or not the action of the chief of the Land Registration Authority was valid.

b.) Whether or not the decision of the appellate court should be aside because the decision dated
August 5, 1981 was already final and executory.

Decision: Both the action of the chief of the LRA and the appellate court’s decision were valid.
Petitioners contend that the judgement of the court was final before the chief of the LRA found out
that some of the lots were covered by homestead patents, as this claim can be anchored in the
Property Registration Decree and should be read in accordance with Section 32 of P.D. 1529, but as
indicated in section 40, the process of creating reports for an accurate description of the land, takes
up time, effort and men. Thus, the rendering of the reports may extend even after the finality of
judgement but not beyond the lapse of year.

Also, in a reading of some portions of the aforesaid decision will show that the lots covered
by the homestead patents were not included among the lands adjudicated to Consolacion M.
Gomez. It was registered in their name, but the portions covered by homestead certificates were
rendered excluded. The rule followed is that when a homestead patent is registered, it cannot be
feasible or converted into a Torrens title. It cannot be subjected to an investigation for
determination or judgement in cadastral proceeding either.

The only remedy here is for the petitioners to bring an action to have the ownership or title
to land judicially settled. If they are found to be the true owners, then may reconvey the parcels of
land to the plaintiffs.