Facts:

• Potenciano Menil and Crispina Nayve are the petitioners in this case.
• Respondents include Agueda Garan, Francisco Calanias, Miguel Nayve, Jr., and the Development Bank of the Philippines.
• A deed of sale was executed by Agueda Garan to the petitioners on May 7, 1960.
• The sale occurred within the five-year prohibitory period mandated by law, rendering it null and void.
• The petitioners sought to recover the purchase price of P415.00 paid for the homestead in lower courts.
• The lower court ruled in favor of the petitioners, prompting an appeal from the respondents.
• The Court of Appeals denied the petitioners' first motion for reconsideration.
• A second motion for reconsideration was filed and noted by the court.
• The Supreme Court identified typographical errors and necessary modifications in its decision.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• The Supreme Court ruled that the deed of sale was null and void due to its execution within the five-year prohibitory period.
• Agueda Garan was ordered to reimburse the petitioners the sum of P415.00, the price of the sale.
• The petitioners were ordered to pay the agricultural loan ...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The Supreme Court's decision was based on the principle that any sale executed within the prohibitory period is null and void.
• This principle protects the rights of homesteaders and prevents premature disposal of their property.
• The Court mandated the return of the purchase price to the petitioners due to the invalidity ...continue reading