MATIAS GONGON, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, THE SPOUSES AMADA AQUINO and RUFINO RIVERA, THE OFFICE OF THE LAND TENURE ADMINISTRATION, and THE OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents. ; G.R. No. L-24421. April 30, 1970.

TOPIC: Art. 6

RATIONALE:

WAIVER OF PREFERENTIAL RIGHT, CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY.— Petitioner’s waiver of his preferential right over the lot being contrary to the avowed policy laid down in Commonwealth Act No. 539, such waiver is null and void. 

AVOWED POLICY: to provide the landless elements of our population with lots upon which to build their homes and small farms which they can cultivate and from which they can derive their livelihood without being beholden to any man’ (Pascual v. Lucas, 51 O.G., No. 4, p. 2429), such measure having been adopted in line with the policy of social justice enshrined in our Constitution to remedy and cure the social unrest caused by the concentration of landed estates in the hands of a few by giving to the landless elements.

GIST:

Matias Gongon was a sublessee of Lot 18-B, Block 23, with an area of 274sqm for a term of 15 years. He already constructed a house therein. However, the govt purchased the estate covering his lot so he filed for the purchase of the lot being the bonafide occupant. It was opposed by Amanda Aquino, the lessee and filed her own application. She was favored and eventually able to obtain a TCT of said lot under her name. Affirmed by CA. SC ruled in favor of Gongon 

FACTS:

1. Lot 18-B, Block 23, with an area of 274sqm in Tambobong Estate originally belong to Roman Catholic Church. It was leased to respondent Amada Aquino, who subleased it to petitioner Matias Gongon in 1934 for a term of 15 yrs and monthly rental of P6.00.

2. The Government purchased an estate from the Roman Catholic Church under the provisions of Section 1 Commonwealth Act No. 539. 

3. Sub lessee Gongon, filed an application with the defunct Rural Progress Administration for the purchase of the lot claiming preferential right as bonafide occupant. This application was opposed by Amanda Aquino, lessee, who also filed her own application, alleging that as bonafide tenant or lessee she had preferential right to purchase a lot.

4. Gongon’s motion was denied by the Land Tenure Administration. Accordingly, the Land Tenure Administration executed a deed of sale in favor of Aquino, as a result, she obtained Transfer Certificate of the lot in her name.

5. Gongon filed a motion for reconsideration having denied by the Court of Appeals for review contending that the appellate erred in failing to recognize his right as sub-lessee-tenant to the lot in question and in not canceling the sale thereof to Aquino as well as its registration in her name; in holding that he had waived his right to the lot in question in favor of Aquino and ordering him to pay rentals plus attorney’s fees and costs.

ISSUE:

(1) whether or not petitioner has the preferential right to purchase the lot in question; -YES

(2) if he has, whether or not the alleged waiver of whatever right he might have had over said lot is valid. -NO

RULING:

1. YES. Gongon has the preferential right. Respondent spouses have other properties, and one where Rufino is the registered bonafide tenant of another lot with an area of 2,761sqm, which is relatively bigger than the lot where petitioner Gongon constructed his house. Where the parties cannot be said to be in equal footing — respondent spouses have their house on another lot they already own which is bigger than that where petitioner constructed his house — justice and equity command that petitioner be given the preferential right to purchase the lot in question to carry out the avowed policy of the law to give land to the landless.

2. NO, the waiver is invalid for it is contrary to public policy. As ruled in the case of Juat v. Land Tenure Administration, G.R. No. L-17080, the avowed policy is "to provide the landless elements of our population with lots upon which to build their homes and small farms which they can cultivate and from which they can derive their livelihood without being beholden to any man." 

The said measure was adopted in line with the policy of social justice enshrined in our Constitution to remedy and cure the social unrest caused by the concentration of landed estates in the hands of a few by giving to the landless elements a piece of land they can call their own."

Thus, the ruling that Gongon had waived his claim of whatever right he has on the lot is deemed NULL and VOID since the waiver is contrary to public policy.

REFERENCE:

Section 1 of Commonwealth Act No. 539, which authorized the President of the Philippines." . . to acquire private lands or any interest, through purchase or expropriation, and to subdivide the same into home lots or small farms for resale at reasonable prices and under such conditions as he may fix to their bona fide tenants or occupants or to private individuals who will work the lands themselves and who are qualified to acquire and own lands in the Philippines."