STATCON WAIVER OF PREFERENTIAL RIGHT

G.R. No. L-24421

Gongon v CA
Date: April 30, 1970

Ponente: Makalintal, J.

Matias Gongon, petitioner 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

Nature of the case: Petition for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals awarding Lot 18-B, Block
23 of Tambobong Estate to Amada Aquino.

FACTS

Petitioner is the occupant of respondent’s lot (Lot 18-B, Block 23 of Tambobong Estate), which the latter
leased as part of a land whose entirety is the property of the Roman Catholic Church. The Government
purchased said property pursuant to a Land Reform Act laid down in C.A. No. 539, which allowed bona
fide tenants or occupants or private citizens to purchase such lots, in that particular preferential order.

Petitioner applied for purchase of the lot claiming to have preferential right to purchase as he is the bona
fide occupant. Respondent, meanwhile, did the same claiming preferential right as the bona fide tenant.

The Director of Lands approved petitioner’s application while the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural
Resources reversed such an approval and granted respondent’s application. Such was affirmed by by the
Land Tenure Administration thereby issuing a deed of sale for the lot and Transfer Certificate of Title
No.84738.

Petitioner went to the trial court where his petition was dismissed.

On further appeal with the Appellate Court, petitioner was again dismissed with Court of Appeals holding
that he has waived his preferential right to purchase the lot in question. Also, being a sub-lessee, he
cannot be considered as bona fide occupant.

ISSUE/S

1.) WON petitioner has the preferential right to purchase the lot in question.

2.) If he has, WON the alleged waiver of whatever right he might have had over the said lot is
valid.

RATIO

Art 6 of the Civil Code provides that “Rights may be waived, unless the waiver if contrary to law, public
order, public policy, morals, or good customs, or prejudicial to a third person with a right recognised by
law.
C.A. 539 lays down a public policy wherein such law affords citizens the opportunity to acquire lands
upon which to build their homes. Thus, any waiver in contrary to said law is null and void. Hence, a
waiver of the petitioner over the said lot is contrary to public policy, thus null and void.

As to the preferential rights, the Court finds that the petitioner be given preferential right basing upon
justice and equity wherein parties do not stand on equal footing when it was held that respondents
were already registered as owners of other lots.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is reversed. The award of the lot in
question to respondent Amada Aquino is set aside; transfer certificate of title No.
84738 of the Registry of Deeds of Rizal is ordered cancelled; and petitioner is
declared to have the preferential right to purchase the said lot. Costs against
respondents.
Notes

Commonwealth Act No. 539 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.”

**Question ko lang, how exactly did the Court of Appeals come to the conclusion that Gongon actually
waived his supposed preferential rights?…

1-C 2015-16 (Avendano)