G.R. No. L-4474

BERNABE ALCERA, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SATURNINO NERY, defendant-appellant.
January 27, 1909

—

FACTS:

On March 22, 1905, Benito Nova sold two parcels of land to Macario Samson for P350, with a pacto de retro stipulation allowing Nova to repurchase within three months after each crop. This contract was ratified before a notary.

On June 7, 1905, while the land was still owned by Samson (subject to Nova’s right of repurchase), Nova “pledged” the same land to Bernabe Alcera for P300. The private document stipulated an 18-month redemption period, renewable for another 18 months, during which Alcera could collect the fruits.

On May 12, 1906, Benito Nova sold the same two parcels of land to Saturnino Nery for P900. The deed stated that the lands had been sold with pacto de retro to Macario Samson and were “redeemed by the purchaser Nery.” On the same date, Macario Samson endorsed the original pacto de retro document in favor of Saturnino Nery, acknowledging the redemption.

On August 31, 1906, Benito Nova again sold the land with pacto de retro to Bernabe Alcera for P300, for a period of eighteen months from June 7, 1905 (the date of the previous “pledge”). In this deed, Nova still claimed the land as his exclusive property.

Bernabe Alcera, claiming ownership, filed a complaint against Saturnino Nery on March 18, 1907. The Court of First Instance of Albay ruled in favor of Alcera, holding that he was the owner and ordering Nery to restore possession. Nery appealed, and Alcera also appealed regarding the P30 collected fruits.

—

ISSUE:

Who has a valid claim of ownership over the land, Bernabe Alcera or Saturnino Nery, given the series of conflicting transactions by Benito Nova?

—

RULING:

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of First Instance and ruled in favor of Saturnino Nery.

1. Ownership to Samson: The March 22, 1905 sale with pacto de retro to Macario Samson transferred ownership and possession of the land to Samson. Nova only retained the right to repurchase.
2. Invalid Pledge to Alcera: Nova’s “pledge” of the land to Alcera on June 7, 1905, was invalid. It could not be a valid contract of pledge as it concerned real property, nor a mortgage, because Nova was not the owner at that time; Samson was.
3. Redemption and Sale to Nery: Samson remained the owner until May 12, 1906, when Nery, by agreement with Nova, repurchased the land from Samson. This extinguished Nova’s right of repurchase. Immediately after this redemption, Nova sold the land absolutely to Nery, effectively transferring ownership to Nery on May 12, 1906.
4. Nullity of Subsequent Sale to Alcera: Consequently, when Nova attempted to sell the land with pacto de retro to Alcera on August 31, 1906, he no longer owned the land nor possessed any right to repurchase it, as these rights had already been transferred to Nery. Thus, the sale to Alcera on August 31, 1906, was null and void as Nova sold something that was no longer his property.

The Court held that Alcera was defrauded by Nova, having accepted land as security and later as a sale with pacto de retro when Nova had no right to convey it.

Therefore, Nery is entitled to the ownership and possession of the land.