G.R. No. 3345
Juan Hernandez Tio‑Quinchuan, et al., plaintiffs‑appellees, vs. Manuel Lim, et al., defendants‑appellants

FACTS
– Plaintiffs claimed ownership of a tract of land, producing a government patent issued in 1891 pursuant to the regulations of 25 June 1880.
– Defendants argued that the plaintiff’s father, the original applicant, was a “Chinaman” and thus barred from the benefits of the law.
– The contested law contained Article 7, which was alleged to limit benefits to native islanders, and Articles 2 and 3 referring to “legua comunal” lands.
– The lower court found the patent valid and awarded recovery to the plaintiffs; no motion for a new trial was filed.

ISSUE
Whether the factual findings and admissions in the pleadings are sufficient to sustain a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs despite the defendants’ claim of statutory exclusion based on the father’s alleged foreign status.

RULING
– The Supreme Court held that the statutes do not prohibit a person of Chinese descent from obtaining a land patent; Article 7 does not restrict benefits to natives, and Articles 2 and 3 apply only to “legua comunal” lands, which the subject land was not.
– Consequently, the findings of fact and the evidence presented were adequate to support the judgment for the plaintiffs.
– The decision of the lower court was affirmed, with costs awarded against the appellants.
– Judgment to be entered after twenty days; the record to be remanded to the lower court for compliance.