Case Digests: Land Titles and Deeds

#8 Homera v. Casa, 157 SCRA 232 (1988)

Case Title, GR SABAS H. HOMENA and ILUMINADA JUANEZA, plaintiffs-appellants, vs. DIMAS CASA AND MARIA CASTOR
Number, Date and the REGISTER OF DEEDS FOR THE PROVINCE OF COTABATO, defendants-appellees.
GR No. L-32749. January 22, 1988.
Ponente YAP, J.
Topic Reason for prohibition and the right to repurchase
Facts • Sabas Homena and Iluminada Juaneza (plaintiffs) purchased from the Spouses Dimas Casa and Maria
(Petitioner; Castor (defendants) 2 hectares of a homestead. The deed of sale (deed) stated that the 2 hectare potion
Respondent) would be conveyed to the plaintiffs only after the 5 year prohibitory period under the Homestead Patent
Law shall have elapsed. Under the Public Land Act, the homestead owner was prohibited from
transferring his rights for a period of 5 years. However, the defendants did not abide by the deed.
Instead, the defendants applied for a homestead patent and were issued an OCT covering the entire lot
including the 2 hectare portion.
• The plaintiffs filed a complaint against the defendants for unlawful acts of dispossession disturbing
plaintiffs’ possession of the 2 hectare portion. The plaintiffs also sought to annul the OCT issued in favor
of defendants on the grounds that the homestead patent was obtained through fraud by stating in their
application that the entire lot was not claimed and occupied by another person. The plaintiffs also
assailed the validity of the homestead patent, only with respect to the 2 hectare portion. CFI dismissed
the complaint on the grounds that the deed was made to circumvent the Public Land Act and is void.
• The defendants argued that the deed that was executed prior to the approval and issuance of the
homestead patent is void because the deed involved public land at the time of its execution and
therefore cannot be conveyed to plaintiffs.
Issue and • Is the sale of a homestead or a portion thereof before the issuance and approval of the homestead
Ruling patent, as well as an agreement between the homestead owner-vendor and the vendee to convey
(Doctrine) the homestead or a portion thereof only after the lapse of the 5 year prohibitory period valid? – NO,
VOID
o Under the Public Land Act, the homestead owner is prohibited from transferring his homestead
rights for a period of 5 years.
o In this case, the deed was intended to circumvent the law and is therefore illegal and void
considering that the plaintiffs' cause of action rests upon the deed wherein the defendants sold to
the plaintiffs the 2 hectare portion of the homestead, which the defendants were still applying for,
on the understanding that the actual conveyance thereof to plaintiffs would be made only after the
lapse of the 5-year period during which the homestead owner was prohibited from transferring his
rights, under the Public Land Act.
o As parties to a void contract, the plaintiffs have no rights which they can enforce, and therefore
cannot even invoke the doctrine of implied trust.
Dispositive • SC denied the petition and affirmed the CFI decision.

Page 9 of 56