Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PETRONILA MAYLEM v. CARMELITA ELLANO

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 192629 2015-11-25	FILINVEST LAND v. EDUARDO R. ADIA BRION, J.
In Maylem v. Ellano,[4] this Court ruled that the waiver or surrender of possession of properties awarded under CARL is a prohibited transfer. Thus, Filinvest's contention that they validly acquired possession through the affidavits is baseless. Since the transfer to Filinvest is prohibited, the respondents are the properties' lawful possessors.
	GR No. 194818 2014-06-09	CHARLES BUMAGAT v. REGALADO ARRIBAY DEL CASTILLO, J.
Besides, when petitioners obtained their emancipation patents and subsequently their certificates of title, they acquired vested rights of absolute ownership over their respective landholdings. "It presupposes that the grantee or beneficiary has, following the issuance of a certificate of land transfer, already complied with all the preconditions required under P.D. No. 27, and that the landowner has been fully compensated for his property. And upon the issuance of title, the grantee becomes the owner of the landholding and he thereby ceases to be a mere tenant or lessee. His right of ownership, once vested, becomes fixed and established and is no longer open to doubt or controversy."[43] Petitioners "became the owner[s] of the subject property upon the issuance of the emancipation patents and, as such, [enjoy] the right to possess the same a right that is an attribute of absolute ownership."[44]
	GR No. 181370 2011-03-09	JULIAN S. LEBRUDO v. REMEDIOS LOYOLA CARPIO, J.
Lebrudo's assertion must fail. The law expressly prohibits any sale, transfer or conveyance by farmer-beneficiaries of their land reform rights within 10 years from the grant by the DAR. The law provides for four exceptions and Lebrudo does not fall under any of the exceptions. In Maylem v. Ellano,[21] we held that the waiver of rights and interests over landholdings awarded by the government is invalid for being violative of agrarian reform laws. Clearly, the waiver and transfer of rights to the lot as embodied in the Sinumpaang Salaysay executed by Loyola is void for falling under the 10-year prohibitory period specified in RA 6657.