G.R. No. L-20091 July 30, 1965
PERPETUA ABUAN, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. EUSTAQUIO S. GARCIA, ET AL., defendants-appellees.

FACTS

Laureano Abuan acquired a homestead. Upon his death, the land passed to his legal heirs, the plaintiffs-appellants, and Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-5486 was issued in their names. On August 7, 1953, the plaintiffs sold the land to the defendants-appellees through a “Deed of Absolute Sale,” a public instrument, and Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-5906 was issued to the defendants. Plaintiffs later filed an action to recover the land, alleging the deed was executed through fraud and without consideration. This case was amicably settled by an “Agreement” dated February 28, 1955, wherein defendants paid P500.00 as partial payment and promised to pay the balance of P1,500.00 on or before April 30, 1955, with a 30-day grace period. The Agreement stipulated it would supersede all previous contracts between the parties involving the land. Plaintiffs claimed full payment was effected only sometime in May 1955. On March 4, 1960, plaintiffs instituted the present action for legal redemption under Section 119 of the Public Land Law ( Commonwealth Act No. 141 ). The defendants moved to dismiss on the ground that the five-year redemption period had expired. The lower court sustained the motion and dismissed the complaint.

ISSUE

When did the five-year period for legal redemption under Section 119 of the Public Land Law begin to run? Specifically, whether it began on August 7, 1953 (execution of the Deed of Absolute Sale), February 28, 1955 (execution of the compromise Agreement), or in May 1955 (upon full payment of the purchase price).

RULING

The five-year redemption period began to run from the date of conveyance, which is the date ownership of the land was transferred to the defendants. Applying the Civil Code, ownership is transferred to the vendee upon delivery. Under Article 1498, when a sale is made through a public instrument, its execution is equivalent to delivery if the contrary does not appear. The Deed of Absolute Sale was a public instrument executed on August 7, 1953, and nothing indicated delivery was not effected; therefore, ownership transferred to the defendants on that date. The subsequent Agreement of February 28, 1955, merely modified the terms of payment and did not revest ownership in the plaintiffs. Even assuming the Deed was void, the Agreement itself manifested an intention to transfer possession and ownership to the defendants, supported by partial payment and the plaintiffs’ desistance from their prior action, constituting delivery brevi manu. The full payment of the price in May 1955 was not a condition precedent for the transfer of ownership. Counting from either August 7, 1953, or February 28, 1955, more than five years had elapsed when the action was filed in March 1960. Therefore, the right of redemption was barred. The order of the lower court dismissing the complaint was affirmed.