CASE DIGEST

4. Rubias v. Batiller, 51 SCRA 120

G.R. No. L-35702 May 29, 1973

Facts:

On August 31, 1964, plaintiff Domingo D. Rubias, a lawyer, filed a

suit to recover the ownership and possession of certain portions of
lot located in Barrio General Luna, Barotac Viejo, Iloilo which he
bought from his father-in-law, Francisco Militante in 1956 against its
present occupant defendant, Isaias Batiller, who illegally entered
said portions of the lot on two occasions — in 1945 and in 1959.

Prior to the war with Japan, Francisco Militante filed an application

for the registration of the title of a lot before the CFI of Iloilo, the
case record was lost before it was heard due to the war. Militante
filed for a reconstitution of the case. The court reconstituted it yet
dismissed the application for registration.

Rubias filed a case to recover ownership before the court and

assailed that the lot was illegally occupied by Isaias Batiller.
Defendant argued that he had been in actual, open, and continuous
possession of the lot since time immemorial. The court made its
judgement in favor of the defendants as he has a better right to
possess the land.

Issues:

1. Whether or not the contract of sale between appellant and his

father-in-law, the late Francisco Militante over the property was
valid.

Held:
No, the contract of sale is void. In accordance with Art. 1409 of the
Civil Code, contracts are inexistent and void from the beginning if
they are expressly prohibited by law. In this case, Rubias had no
cause of action as application for registration of the lot filed by
Militante was dismissed by the lower courts. there was no right for
the land to be transferred by the claims to Rubias.