GR L 7747; (November, 1955) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-7747 November 29, 1955
NIEVES TINIO, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. GREGORIO FRANCES, ET AL., defendants and appellees.
FACTS
Sergio Nicolas applied for a homestead in 1917, and his final proof was approved by the Director of Lands on June 15, 1943, with an order for the issuance of a patent in favor of his heirs, as Nicolas had already died. In 1947, the heirs transferred their rights to the land to the defendants. This transfer was approved by the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce on March 9, 1948, after which a homestead patent and Original Certificate of Title No. P-558 were issued in the defendants’ favor. In 1953, the heirs filed an action to annul the conveyances and recover the land. The trial court upheld the validity of the transfer, ruling it was authorized under Section 20 of the Public Land Act (Commonwealth Act No. 141) and that the prohibition in Section 118 did not apply since the patent had not yet been issued at the time of the transfer.
ISSUE
Whether the conveyances of the homestead rights by the heirs of the original homesteader to the defendants are valid under the provisions of the Public Land Act.
RULING
No, the conveyances are null and void. The Supreme Court held that the transfers did not comply with the mandatory requirements of Section 20 of the Public Land Act. First, there was no showing that the Director of Lands was satisfied that the homesteader “cannot continue with his homestead through no fault of his own,” a condition expressly required by Section 20. On the contrary, the order for the patent issuance stated the homesteader had fully complied with all legal requirements. Second, the transfers made in 1947 lacked the “previous approval” of the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce, as the approval was granted in 1948, after the conveyances. Furthermore, the Court ruled that from the date of the order for the issuance of a patent (June 15, 1943), the homesteader’s right becomes absolute, and for purposes of the prohibition against alienation in Section 118, it is equivalent to the patent itself being issued. Therefore, the conveyances in 1947 violated the prohibition. The Court ordered the cancellation of the defendants’ title and the return of the land to the plaintiffs upon restitution of the purchase price.