ELENA SALENILLAS AND BERNARDINO SALENILLAS, petitioners, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and HONORABLE RAYMUNDO SEVA, JUDGE OF BRANCH 38 OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF CAMARINES NORTE and WILLIAM GUERRA, respondents.; G.R. No. 78687 January 31, 1989
September 05, 2020
TOPIC: Between two statutory interpretations, which better serves the purpose of the law should prevail.
GIST:
RATIONALE:
Section 119 of the Public Land Act, in speaking of "legal heirs," makes no distinction.
Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos. (Where the law does not distinguish, neither should we distinguish.)
"legal heirs" - regardless of the process of coming into their possession of the property.
be it thru inheritance or sale
------
FACTS:
1. Encisco spouses sold their lot by virtue of an Absolute Deed of Sale to their daughter and son-in-law, Elena and Bernardino Sallenillas on 28 February 1970 for P900.00.
2. TCT No. T-8104 was then issued by Register of Deeds CamNorte in the name of the Sallenillas.
3. They mortgaged the property on 04 December 1975 to Philippine National Bank as a security loan for P2,500.00.
4. For failure to pay their loan, extrajudicial forclosure proceeding was instituted. The property was sold at a public auction to William Guerra on 27 February 1981. He was issued a "Certificate of Sale." On 12 July 1983, "Sheriff's Final Deed" was executed in his favor.
5. August 1983, PNB motioned for a writ of possession. On 22 September 1983, an order for issuance thereof in favor of Guerra was issued.
6. 17 November 1983, they attempted to place the property in possession of the private respondent but the petitioners refused to leave the premises and instead offer to repurchase it under Sec. 119 of Public Land Act.
7. 15 August 1984, private respondent motioned for the issuance of writ if possession.
8. 31 August 1984, Sallenillas opposed and instead made a formal offer to repurchase the property.
9. 12 October 1984 issued the writ of possession. Petitioners moved for reconsideration but it was denied.
10. They appealed to CA but it was denied for lack of merit.
ISSUE:
W/N spouses Sallenillas can repurchase their foreclosed lot by virtue of Sec. 119 of the Public Land Act.
RULING:
YES. They can repurchase.
Sec. 119 of the Public Land Act provides: Every conveyance of land acquired under the free patent or homestead provisions, when proper, shall be subject to repurchase by the applicant, his widow, or legal heirs within a period of five years from the date of the conveyance.
Thus, the contention of the private respondent sustained by the respondent appellate court that the petitioners do not belong to any of those classes of repurchasers because they acquired the property not through inheritance but by sale, has no legal basis. The petitioners-spouses are the daughter and son-in-law of the Encisos, patentees of the contested property. At the very least, petitioner Elena Salenillas, being a child of the Encisos, is a "legal heir" of the latter. As such, and even on this score alone, she may therefore validly repurchase. This must be so because Section 119 of the Public Land Act, in speaking of "legal heirs," makes no distinction. Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos. (Where the law does not distinguish, neither should we distinguish.)
The very purpose of Section 119 of the Public Land Act is to give the homesteader or patentee every chance to preserve for himself and his family the land that the State had gratuitously given him as a reward for his labor in clearing and cultivating it.
As regards the redemption price, applying Sec. 30 of Rule 39 of the Revised Rules of Court, the petitioners should reimburse the private respondent the amount of the purchase price at the public auction plus interest at the rate of one per centum per month up to November 17, 1983, together with the amounts of assessments and taxes on the property that the private respondent might have paid after purchase and interest on the last named amount at the same rate as that on the purchase price.
SC decision: petition is GRANTED. Rtc and CA's ruling REVERSED.
Lecture: land tenants are usually given ng lupa na matataniman nila and mapapamana sa mga heirs. Alam ng framers na magkaron ng time na mabenta/masangla ng mga homesteaders yung land. kaya para mabigyan pa ng chance mabawi yung property. :)
prescriptive period: Start from the formal offer to repurchase of their property.
Comments
Post a Comment