Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

|

ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

Like

chanrobles.com

Tweet
Search

Tweet

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2009 > April 2009 Decisions > G.R. No. 168631 - LAND BANK OF
THE PHILIPPINES v. CAROLINA VDA. DE ABELLO, ET AL.:

Search
G.R. No. 168631 - LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CAROLINA VDA. DE ABELLO, ET AL.

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. NO. 168631 : April 7, 2009]
LAND BANK OF THE PHILLIPINES, Petitioner, v. CAROLINA B. VDA. DE ABELLO and HEIRS OF
ELISEO ABELLO, NAMELY: NENITA, SULITA, ROLANDO, IMELDA and ELISEO, JR., all surnamed
ABELLO, Respondents.
DECISION
PERALTA, J.:
This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari, under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, seeking to annul and set
aside the Decision1 dated February 28, 2005, and Resolution2 dated June 27, 2005, of the Court of
Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 85091.
The antecedents are as follows:
Respondent Carolina Vda. de Abello (Carolina) is the widow of the late Eliseo Abello, while the rest of the
respondents are their children. Respondents are the owners of a parcel of land covered by Transfer
Certificate of Title (TCT) No. NT-55863, containing an area of 12.1924 hectares, situated at Brgy. Sto.
Nio 3rd, San Jose City.3

DebtKollect Company, Inc.

In a letter4 dated March 6, 2000 addressed to a certain Dalmacio Regino, thru Eliseo Abello, the Land
Valuation and Landowner's Compensation Office III of the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) informed
the respondents that 10.3476 hectares of the their property have been placed under the government's
Operation Land Transfer5 and that the assessed compensation for the land's expropriation was
P146,938.54.
Using the guidelines for just compensation embodied in Presidential Decree No. 276 (PD 27) and
implemented in Executive Order No. 2287 (EO 228), and taking into consideration the Government
Support Price (GSP) for one cavan of 50 kilos palay in October 21, 1972 which was P35.00,8 the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and the LBP computed the value of the 10.3476 hectare land at
P40,743.66.9 Based on DAR Administrative Order No. 13 (DAR AO 13),10 series of 1994, a 6%
increment in the amount of P106,194.88 was added to the original valuation.11 Thus, the formula they
used to compute the value of the property was:

ChanRobles Intellectual Property


Division

Land value

Average Gross Production (AGP) x 2.5


x Government Support Price (GSP)

Or

45 x 2.5 x 35

P3,937.5 x 10.3476 hectare

P40,743.66 + P106,198.88 Increment


per CAR AO 13, S. 1994

P 146,938.54

Claim No. 03-EO-94-0573 reflects that the proceeds of the claim amounts as follows:
Original

Increment per
DAR AO 13, S. 1994

Total

Cash P

4,074.37

10,619.48

14,693.85

Bond

36,669.29

95,575.40

132,244.69

Total

40,743.66

106,194.88

146,938.5412

In a letter13 dated June 6, 2000, Carolina informed LBP that she is the owner of the said parcel of land
and not Dalmacio Regino. Further, she stated that the prevailing market value of an agricultural land at
Sto. Nio 3rd, San Jose City at that time was P300,000.00 to P400,000.00 per hectare. She pegged
the value of the subject property at P350,000.00 per hectare or a total of P4,267,340.00, which should
be paid to her and the other heirs of Eliseo Abello.14
Subsequently, respondents filed a Petition for Just Compensation15 before the Special Agrarian Court
(SAC), Regional Trial Court, Branch 33, Guimba, Nueva Ecija, which petition was later docketed as
Special Agrarian Case No. 1193-G.
Respondents alleged that they are the owners of an agricultural land covered by TCT No. NT-55863
consisting of 12.1924 hectares situated at Barangay Sto. Nio 3rd, San Jose City, their ownership
being evidenced by a deed of absolute sale executed in favor of the spouses Eliseo Abello and Carolina
Abello by the registered owner, Eleuteria Vda. de Ignacio; that 10.3476 hectares of the aforesaid land
was placed under Operation Land Transfer by the government; that the defendant LBP fixed the value of
their land at P145,938.54; that their land yields an average harvest of 120 cavans of palay per hectare
per cropping; that the prevailing purchase price per hectare in the area ranges from P300,000.00 to
P400,000.00 per hectare; and that the petitioners are willing to sell aforesaid landholding for
P350,000.00 per hectare.16 Ultimately, they prayed, among other things, that the just compensation for
the subject property be fixed in the amount of not less than P4,267,340.00.
On July 26, 2002, LBP filed its Answer.17 Among other things, LBP alleged that the said landholding was
under Operation Land Transfer by the DAR, and was valued in accordance with PD 27 and EO 228; that
it was endorsed to the LBP for payment in November 1994; that LBP reviewed the claim and found the
same in order; that the subject landholding was valued at P40,743.66 for the 10.3426 hectares covered;
that the average gross production (AGP) was determined to be 45 cavans per hectare; that the
government support price in 1972 per cavan of palay was P35.00, the price obtaining at that time; that
in addition to the amount of P40,743.66, DAR AO 13 provides for an incremental increase of 6%
compounded annually, hence, the total compensation due the landowner is P146,938.54.18 LBP prayed
that the said valuation be adopted by the SAC or that it be judicially determined in accordance with law
and jurisprudence.
Thereafter, the SAC appointed commissioners to assist it in examining, investigating, and ascertaining
the facts relevant to the dispute, including the valuation of the subject landholding. The team was
headed by Officer-in-Charge, Branch Clerk of Court, Mr. Arsenio S. Esguerra, Jr. (Esguerra), with Mr. Gil
Alvarez and Mr. Willy Wong as members.
On January 30, 2003, Commissioner Esguerra submitted a Consolidated Commissioner's Report19
detailing their findings. Based on their ocular inspection, the land is situated four kilometers from the
town proper and accessible by a feeder road. The topography is generally flat and there are water
pumps installed. He recommended that the compensation for the subject land should be pegged at
P200,000.00 per hectare. It reads:
xxx
The landholdings of the plaintiff has an aggregate area of 10.3476 hectares situated at Barangay Sto.
Nio 3rd, San Jose City.

April-2009 Jurisprudence
A.C. No. 5195 - NELIA PASUMBAL DE-CHAVEZBLANCO REPRESENTED BY ATTY. EUGENIA J. MU OS v.
ATTY. JAIME LUMASAG, JR.

The landholding is classified as riceland. It is four (4) kilometers away from the city proper of San Jose
City and traversed by a feeder road. It is accessible to all kinds of transportation. It is along the San
Jose City-Lupao, Nueva Ecija provincial highway. The topography is generally flat and there is a creek
(Linamuyak Creek) near the landholdings where farmer-beneficiaries can derive water.
rbl r l l lbrr

A.C. No. 7813 - Carlito P. Carangdang v. Atty. Gilbert


S. Obmina

There are also water pumps installed, hence, the landholding is artificially irrigated. There is electricity in
the site. The average gross harvest ranges from 100 to 110 cavans per hectare.

A.M. No. 2008-12-SC Formerly A.M. No. 08-7-4-SC


and A.M. NO. P-08-2510 - IN RE: IMPROPER
SOLICATATION OF COURT EMPLOYEES / OFFICE OF
THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. SHEELA R. NOBLEZA

Based from the foregoing considerations, the undersigned believes that the compensation of plaintiff's
landholdings with an aggregate area of 10.3476 hectares is P200,000.00 per hectare.

A.M. No. MTJ-06-1651 Formerly OCA IPI No. 041576-MTJ - PROSECUTOR ROBERT M. VISBAL v. JUDGE
WENCESLAO B. VANILLA

On April 12, 2004, the SAC rendered a Decision20 adopting the recommendation of its appointed
commissioners which fixed the just compensation for the subject property at P200,000.00 per hectare.
The decretal portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered:

A.M. No. MTJ-08-1706 Formerly OCA IPI No. 081984-MTJ - MUTYA B. VICTORIO v. JUDGE MAXWELL S.
ROSETE

1. Fixing the just compensation for plaintiffs' 10.342 hectare land at P200,000 per hectare
or a total of P2,068,520.00

A.M. NO. P-05-1996


TYRONE V. TAN

2. Ordering the defendant Land Bank of the Philippines to pay the above amount to the
plaintiffs.

ESTELITO

R.

MARABE

v.

A.M. No. P-05-2065 - REPORT ON THE FINANCIAL


AUDIT ETC.
A.M. No. P-07-2298 and A.M. No. P-07-2299 - Peteb
B. Mallonga v. Marites R. Manio / Hon. Lyliha AbellaAquino v. Marites R. Manio
A.M. No. P-07-2321 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 07-2492P
JUDGE
PELAGIA
DALMACIO-JOAQUIN
v.
NICOMEDES C. DELA CRUZ ETC.
A.M. No. P-07-2344 - DOMINGO U. SABADO, JR. v.
LANIEL P. JORNADA ETC.
A.M. No. P-07-2366 Formerly OCA-I.P.I. No. 07-2519P - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. MA.
CELIA A. FLORES
A.M. No. P-08-2469 Formerly OCA IPI No. 07-2509-P

SO ORDERED.21
Both the LBP and the DAR filed separate motions for reconsideration which was denied in the Order22
dated July 5, 2004.
Pursuant to Section 60 of RA 6657, LBP sought recourse before the CA in CA-G.R. SP No. 85091,
arguing that:
A. THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN FIXING THE JUST COMPENSATION OF THE COVERED
AREA OF 10.3476 HECTARES AT P200,000.00 PER HECTARE BY NOT FOLLOWING THE
APPROPRIATE LAND VALUATION FORMULA PRESCRIBED UNDER PD 27 AND EO NO. 288.
B. THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN APPLYING THE VALUATION FACTORS UNDER R.A. 6657
TO SUBJECT LANDHOLDING ACQUIRED UNDER P.D. 27.23
On February 28, 2005, the CA rendered a Decision24 denying the petition, the dispositive portion of
which reads:

and A.M. OCA IPI No. 08-2857-P - ERLINA P. JOLITO v.


MARLENE E. TANUDRA/ERLINA P. JOLITO v. GEORGE E.
GAREZA

WHEREFORE, finding no reversible error from the order abovementioned, the petition is hereby DENIED
and the decision of the Regional Trial Court[,] Branch No. 33 of Guimba, Nueva Ecija in Agrarian Case
No. 1193-G is AFFIRMED in all respect.

A.M. No. P-08-2523 Formerly OCA-I.P.I. No. 08-2872P - ATTY. MARLYDS L. ESTARDO-TEODORO v. CARLOS
S. SEGISMUNDO

SO ORDERED.25

A.M. No. P-09-2622 Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 082814-P - DOROTHY FE MAH-AREVALO v. ELMER P. MPE
A.M. No. P-09-2628 Formerly A.M. No. OCA IPI No.
07-2686-P - WILSON C. ONG v. ARIEL R. PASCAIO
A.M. No. RTJ-05-1917 - DEE C. CHUAN & SONS, INC.
v. JUDGE WILLIAM SIMON P. PERALTA
A.M No. RTJ-06-1976 - PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
MANUEL F. TORREVILLAS v. JUDGE ROBERTO A.
NATIVIDAD ETC.
A.M. RTJ-07-2058 - Dolores S. Bago v. Judge Ernesto
P. Pagayatan etc.
A.M. No. RTJ-09-2176 - PROSECUTOR JORGE D.
BACULI v. JUDGE MEDEL ARNALDO B. BELEN
B.M. No. 1222 - RE: 2003 BAR EXAMINATIONS ATTY.
DANILO DE GUZMAN (PETITIONER)
G.R. No. 126890 - United Planters Sugar Milling Co.,
Inc. (UPSUMCO) v. The Honorable Court of Appeals, et
al.
G.R. No. 130088 - TALA REALY SERVICES CORP., ET
AL. v. HON. ALICIA B. GONZALES-DECANO, ET
AL./NANCY L. TY v. HON. WENCESLAO E. EBABAO, ETC.
ET AL./TALA REALY SERVICES CORP., ET AL. VS.BANCO
FILIPINO SAVINGS AND MORTAGE BANK/TALA REALY
SERVICES CORP., ET A
G.R. No. 132540 - ALBAY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,
INC., ET AL. v. HON. RAFAEL P. SANTELICES, ET AL.
G.R. No. 135703 - PRESIDENTIAL AD HOC FACT
FINDING
COMMITTEE
ON
BEHEST
LOANS,
REPRESENTED
BY
ORLANDO
L.
SALVADOR
v.
OMBUDSMAN ANIANO A. DESIERTO, ET AL.
G.R. No. 138814 - MAKATI STOCK EXCHANGE, INC.,
ET AL. v. MIGUEL V. CAMPOS
G.R. No. 140717 - ANNIE L. MANUBAY, ET AL. v. HON.
ERNESTO GARILAO
G.R. No. 145222 - SPOUSES ROBERTO BUADO AND
VENUS BUADO v. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS,
ET AL.
G.R. No. 145867 - ESTATE OF SOLEDAD MANANTAN
ETC. v. ANICETO SOMERA
G.R. No. 146408 - PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC. v.
ENRIQUE LIGAN, ET AL.
G.R. No. 146622 - LEONORA P. CALANZA, ET AL. v.
PAPER INDUSTRIES CORP., ET AL.
G.R. NOS. 148263 and 148271-72 - ARMANDO DAVID
v. NATIONAL FEDERATION OF LABOR UNION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 149221 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v.
MARCELINO BANATAO, ET AL. AND MARCIANO CARAG,
ET AL.
G.R. No. 149907 - ROMA DRUG AND ROMEO
RODRIGUEZ v. RTC OF GUAGUA PAMPANGA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 152048 - FELIX B. PEREZ, ET AL. v.
PHILIPPINE TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE COMPANY
G.R. No. 152131 - FLORAIDA TERA A v. HON.
ANTONIO DE SAGUN ETC.
G.R. No. 152318 - DEUTSCHE GESELLSCHAFT FUR
TECHNICHE v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 154473 and G.R. NO. 155573 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES v. ALFREDO L. BENIPAYO /
PHOTOKINA MARKETING CORPORATION v. ALFREDO L.
BENIPAYO
G.R. No. 154609 - MA. CORAZON SAN JUAN v.
CELESTE M. OFFRIL
G.R. No. 155639 - JUANARIA A. RIVERA v. UNITED
LABORATORIES, INC.
G.R. No. 156302 - THE HEIRS OF GEORGE Y. POE v.
MALAYAN INSURANCE CO. INC.
G.R. No. 156766 - ROSARIO A. GATUS v. QUALITY
HOUNSE INC., AND CHRISTOPHER CHUA
G.R. No. 157147 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
WILFREDOO CAWALING

The CA opined that the SAC made no mistake when it ruled that the provisions of RA 6657 is controlling
and that the provisions of PD 27 and EO 228 shall apply only in suppletory character to RA 6657.26
LBC filed a motion for reconsideration, but it was denied in the Resolution27 dated June 27, 2005.
Hence, this present petition.
The core issue submitted by LBP to be resolved in the present case is:
WHETHER OR NOT THE SPECIAL AGRARIAN COURT CAN DISREGARD THE FORMULA PRESCRIBED
UNDER
P.D. NO. 27 AND E.O. 228 IN FIXING THE JUST COMPENSATION OF P.D. 27-COVERED LAND.28
LBP maintains that the formula under PD 27 and EO 228, coupled with the grant of compounded interest
pursuant to DAR AO 13, is sufficient to arrive at a just compensation for the subject property. Moreover,
LBP insists that it is the value of the property at the time of taking - - not at the time of payment - that is controlling.29
To buttress its claim, LBP argues that the property was legally taken by the government upon the
effectivity of PD 27 or on October 21, 1972, and it is such date that ownership over the subject land was
deemed transferred from the landowner to the farmer-beneficiaries. When EO 228 fixed the basis in
determining the value of the land using the government support price (GSP) for one cavan of 50 kilos of
palay on October 21, 1972 at P35.00, it was in cognizance of the rule that just compensation is the
value of the property at the time of the taking. As such, PD 27 and EO 228 should be the basis in
computing the value of the land because respondents were effectively deprived not only of possession,
but also of dominion over the subject property on October 21, 1972.30
The petition is bereft of merit.
As the opening paragraph of PD 27 explains, the statute was issued in order to address the then
prevailing violent conflict and social tension brought about by the iniquitous landownership by a few. It
is within this context that former President Ferdinand Marcos deemed it proper to declare the
emancipation of all tenant-farmers effective October 21, 1972.31 Thereafter, EO 228 declared full land
ownership to all qualified farmer - beneficiaries as of October 21, 1972 and gave the formula for land
valuation.
rbl r l l lbrr

On June 15, 1988, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), or RA 6657, was enacted to
promote social justice to the landless farmers and provide "a more equitable distribution and ownership
of land with due regard to the rights of landowners to just compensation and to the ecological needs of
the nation."32
Section 4 of RA 6657 provides that the CARL shall cover all public and private agricultural lands,
including other lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture. Section 733 provides that rice and
corn lands under PD 27, among other lands, will comprise phase one of the acquisition plan and
distribution program. Section 7534 of RA 6657 expressly states that the provisions of PD 27 and EO 228
and 229, and other laws not inconsistent with RA 6657, shall have suppletory effect.
In Office of the President, Malacaang, Manila v. Court of Appeals,35 this Court ruled that the seizure
of the landholding did not take place on the date of effectivity of PD 27 but would take effect on the
payment of just compensation. LBP's contention that the subject property was acquired for purposes of
agrarian reform on October 21, 1972, the time of the effectivity of PD 27, ergo just compensation
should be based on the value of the property as of that time, is consequently flawed.
In Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform,36 the Court
held that it is a recognized rule that title to the property expropriated shall pass from the owner to the
expropriator only upon full payment of just compensation. The Court further held that:
It is true that P.D. No. 27 expressly ordered the emancipation of tenant-farmer as [of] October 21, 1972
and declared that he shall "be deemed the owner" of a portion of land consisting of a family-sized farm
except that "no title to the land owned by him was to be actually issued to him unless and until he had
become a full-fledged member of a duly recognized farmer's cooperative." It was understood, however,
that full payment of just compensation also had to be made first, conformably to the constitutional
requirement.
In Land Bank of the Philippines v. Natividad,37 the Court held that the determination of just
compensation should be in accordance with RA 6657, and not PD 27 and EO 228, thus:
It would certainly be inequitable to determine just compensation based on the guideline provided by PD
27 and EO 228 considering the DAR's failure to determine the just compensation for a considerable
length of time. That just compensation should be determined in accordance with RA 6657, and not PD
27 or EO 228, is especially imperative considering that just compensation should be the full and fair
equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator, the equivalent being real,
substantial, full and ample."
Under the factual circumstances of the case, the agrarian reform process is still incomplete as the just
compensation to be paid respondents has yet to be settled. Considering the passage RA 6657 before the
completion of this process, the just compensation should be determined and the process concluded
under the said law.38 Indeed, this Court has time and again upheld the applicability of RA 6657, with PD
27 and EO 228 having only suppletory effect, conformably with our ruling in Paris v. Alfeche.39
chanrobles virtual law library

Section 17 of RA 6657, which is particularly relevant, providing as it does the guideposts for the
determination of just compensation, reads as follows:
Sec. 17. Determination of Just Compensation. - In determining just compensation, the cost of
acquisition of the land, the current value of like properties, its nature, actual use and income, the sworn
valuation by the owner, the tax declarations, and the assessment made by government assessors shall
be considered. The social and economic benefits contributed by the farmers and the farmworkers and by
the Government to the property as well as the non-payment of taxes or loans secured from any
government financing institution on the said land shall be considered as additional factors to determine
its valuation.
To be sure, just compensation should be determined in accordance with RA 6657, and not PD 27 or EO
228. This is especially imperative considering that just compensation should be the full and fair

G.R. No. 157584 - Congressman Enrique T. Garcia v.


The Executive Secretary, et al.

equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator, the equivalent being real,
substantial, full and ample.40

G.R. No. 157723 - ROMEO SAYO Y AQUINO, ET AL. v.


PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

The determination of the proper valuation of the land upon any other basis would not only be unjust, it
is bordering on absurdity. For years, respondents have been deprived of the use and enjoyment of their
landholding, yet to date, they have not received just compensation therefor. Although the purpose of PD
27 was the emancipation of tenants from the bondage of the soil and transferring to them the ownership
of the land they till, such noble purpose should not trample on the landowners' right to be fairly and
justly compensated for the value of their property.

G.R. No. 157862 - PHILIPPINE COUNTRYSIDE RURAL


BANK INC. v. JOVENAL B. TORING
G.R. No. 158071 - JOSE SANTOS v. COMMITTEE ON
CLAIMS SETTLEMENT, ET AL.
G.R. No. 158805 - VALLEY GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB,
INC. v. ROSA O. VDA. CARAM
G.R. No. 158819 - ANTERO LUISTRO v. COURT OF
APPEALS AND FIRST GAS POWER CORPORATION.
G.R. NO. 158885 and G.R. NO. 170680 - FORT
BONIFACIO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. CIR, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 158956 - ILIGAN CEMENT CORPORATION v.
ILIASCOR
EMPLOYEES
AND
WORKERS
UNIONSOUTHERN PHILIPPINES FEDERATION OF LABOR, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 159687 - GULF AIR
ABDULLAH, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

JASSIM

HINDRI

G.R. No. 160132 - SERAFIN NARANJA, ET AL. v. THE


HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 160467 - SOLEDAD MU OS MESA v. SOCIAL
SECURITY SYSTEM, ET AL.
G.R. No. 160918 - CONCEPCION
HILARIA ROBLE DE TEMPLE, ET AL.

ALCANTARA

G.R. No. 161539 - INTERNATIONAL


TERMINAL SERVICES, INC. v. FGU
CORPORATION, ET AL.

v.

CONTAINER
INSURANCE

In sum, the SAC and the CA committed no reversible error when it ruled that it is the provisions of RA
6657 that is applicable to the present case. The SAC arrived at the just compensation for respondents'
property after taking into consideration the commissioners' report on the nature of the subject
landholding, its proximity from the city proper, its use, average gross production, and the prevailing
value of the lands in the vicinity. This Court is convinced that the SAC correctly determined the amount
of just compensation due to respondents in accordance with, and guided by, RA 6657 and existing
jurisprudence.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision dated February 28, 2005 and Resolution dated June
27, 2005 of the Court of Appeals, in CA-G.R. SP No. 85091, are AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner.
SO ORDERED.
Endnotes:
*
1

Penned by Associate Justice Eugenio S. Labitoria, with Associate Justices Noel G. Tijam
and Arturo D. Brion (now a member of this Court), concurring, rollo, pp. 45-51.
2

Id. at 54-55.

Id. at 148-150.

CA rollo, p. 93.

Rollo, p. 149.

G.R. No. 161778 - CAYETANO A. TEJANO, JR. v. THE


HON. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.
G.R. No. 161827 - SESINANDO POLINTAN v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 162272 - SANTIAGO C. DIVINAGRACIA v.
CONSOLIDATED BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC., ET AL.

Decreeing the Emancipation of Tenant's From the Bondage of the Soil, Transferring to
Them the Ownership of the Land They Till and Providing the Instruments and Mechanism
Therefor.
7

Declaring Full Land Ownership to Qualified Farmer Beneficiaries Covered by Presidential


Decree No. 27; Determining the Value of Remaining Unvalued Rice and Corn Lands
Subject to P.D. No. 27; and Providing for the Manner of Payment by the Farmer
Beneficiary and Mode of Compensation to the Landowner.
8

G.R. No. 162370 - DAVID TIU v. COURT OF APPEALS


AND EDGARDO POSTANES
G.R. No. 163072 - Manila
Authority v. City of Pasay, et al.

International

Per Special Order No. 602 dated March 20, 2009.

EO 228, Sec. 2.
Henceforth, the valuation of rice and corn lands covered by P.D. No. 27
shall be based on the average gross production determined by the
Barangay Committee on Land Production in accordance with Department
Memorandum Circular No. 26, Series of 1973, and related issuances and
regulations of the Department of Agrarian Reform. The average gross
production per hectare shall be multiplied by two and a half (2.5), the
product of which shall be multiplied by Thirty Five Pesos (P35.00), the
government support price for one cavan of 50 kilos of palay on October 21,
1972, or Thirty One Pesos (P31.00), the government support price for one
cavan of 50 kilos of corn on October 21, 1972, and the amount arrived at
shall be the value of the rice and corn land, as the case may be, for the
purpose of determining its cost to the farmer and compensation to the
landowner.

Airport

G.R. No. 163583 - BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO v.


JOSE ISIDRO N. CAMACHO, ET AL.
G.R. NOS. 163957-58 and G.R. NOS. 164009-11 MUNIB S. ESTINO AND ERNESTO PESCADERA v.
PEOPLE
OF
THE
PHILIPPINES/
ERNESTO
G.
PESCADERA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 164170 - MACA-ANGCOS ALAWIYA Y ABDUL,
ET AL. v. HON. SIMEON A. DATUMANONG, ET AL.
G.R. No. 164213 - VALENTIN CABRERA ET AL. v.
ELIZABETH GETARUELA ET AL.
G.R. No. 164368 - People of the Philippines v. Joseph
Ejercito Estrada, et al.

CA rollo, p. 93; rollo, pp. 186-192.

10

Rules and Regulations Governing the Grant of Increment of Six Percent (6%) Yearly
Interest Compounded Annually on Lands Covered by P.D. No. 27 and E.O. No. 228.
11

CA rollo, p. 93.

12

Id.

13

Rollo, pp. 177-179.

14

Id. at 178-179.

15

Id. at 146 - 154.

16

Id. at 148-152.

17

Id. at 183-185.

18

Id. at 183-184.

19

Records, pp. 111-112.

20

Rollo, pp. 127-131.

21

Id. at 131.

22

Records, p. 275.

23

Rollo, p. 109.

24

G.R. No. 168631 - LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES


v. CAROLINA VDA. DE ABELLO, ET AL.

Id. at 45-51.

25

Id. at 50.

G.R. No. 168716 - HFS PHLIPPINES, INC., RUBEN T.

26

Id. at 48-59.

G.R. No. 164681 - BERNARDINO V. NAVARRO v. P.V.


PAJARILLO LINER AND NLRC
G.R. No. 165443 - CALATAGAN GOLF CLUB, INC. v.
SIXTO CLEMENTE, JR.
G.R. No. 164785 and G.R. NO. 165636 - ELISEO F.
SORIANO v. MA. CONSOLIZA P. LAGUARDIA ETC.
G.R. No. 165927 - ERNESTO Z. GIDUQUIO v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 166199 - THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, ET
AL. v. CHRISTOPHER KORUGA
G.R. No. 166510 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
BENJAMIN
"KOKOY"
T.
ROMULADEZ
AND
THE
SANDIGANBAYAN
G.R. No. 166748 - LAUREANO V. HERMOSO, ET AL. v.
HEIRS OF ANTONIO FRANCIA AND PETRA FRANCIA
G.R. No. 167768 - MALAYAN INSURANCE COMPANY,
INC. v. VICTORIAS MILLING COMPANY, INC.
G.R. No. 168273 - HARBOR VIEW RESTAURANT v.
REYNALDO LABRO

DEL ROSARIO AND


RONALDO R. PILAR

IUM

SHIP

MANAGEMENT

v.

G.R. No. 168734 & G.R. No. 170621 - MARCELINO


LOPEZ, ET AL. v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL./
NOEL RUBBER AND DEVELOPMENT CORP, ET AL. v.
JOSE ESQUIVEL, JR., ET AL.
G.R. No. 168800 - NEW REGENT SOURCES, INC. v.
TEOFILO VICTOR TANJUATCO, JR. AND VICENTE
CUEVAS
G.R. No. 169914 & 174166 - ASIA'S EMERGING
DRAGON CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT
OF
TRANSPORTATION
AND
COMMUNICATIONS,
SECRETARY LEANDRO R. MENDOZA and MANILA
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY, Respondents.

27

Id. at 54-55.

28

Id. at 31.

29

Id. at 35-38.

30

Id. at 34.

31

Corua v. Cinamin, G.R. No. 154286, February 28, 2006, 483 SCRA 507, 519.

32

RA 6657, Sec 2.

33

SEC. 7. Priorities The DAR, in coordination with the PARC shall plan and program
the acquisition and distribution of all agricultural lands through a period of ten (10) years
from the effectivity of this Act. Lands shall be acquired and distributed as follows:

G.R. No. 170093 - JOSE PEPITO M. AMORES M.D. v.


CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE LUNG CENTER OF THE PHILIPPINES AS
REPRESENTED BY HON. MANUEL M. DAYRIT AND
FERNANDO A. MELENDRES, M.D.

Phase One: Rice and Corn lands under Presidential Decree No. 27; all idle
or abandoned lands; all private lands voluntarily offered by the owners for
agrarian reform; all lands foreclosed by government financial institutions;
all lands acquired by the Presidential Commission on Good Government
(PCGG); and all other lands owned by the government devoted to or
suitable for agriculture, which shall be acquired and distributed immediately
upon the effectivity of this Act, with the implementation to be completed
within a period of not more than four (4) years;

G.R. No. 170235 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.


JAIME CADAG JIMENEZ
G.R. No. 170270 - Newsounds Broadcasting Network,
Inc., et al. v. Hon. Ceasar G. Dy, et al.
G.R. No. 170532 - THE PROVINCIAL ASSESOR OF
MARINDUQUE v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 170589 - OLYMPIO REVALDO v. PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 170750 - HEIRS OF TOMAS DOLLETON, ET
AL. v. FIL-ESTATE MANAGEMENT INC., ET AL.

34

SEC. 75. Suppletory Application of Existing Legislation. - The provisions of Republic Act
Number 3844 as amended, Presidential Decree Number 27 and 266 as amended,
Executive Order Number 228 and 229, both Series of 1987; and other laws not
inconsistent with this Act shall have suppletory effect.
35

413 Phil. 711 (2001).

36

G.R. No. 78742, July 14, 1989, 175 SCRA 343, 390.

37

G.R. No. 127198, May 16, 2005, 458 SCRA 441, 452-453.

G.R. No. 170977 - JOSE D. DEL VALLE, JR. AND


ADOLFO C. ALEMANIA v. FRANCIS B. DY

38

G.R. No. 171072 - GOLDERES REALTY CORP. v.


CYPRESS GARDENS ETC.

39

G.R. No. 171138 - H. TAMBUNTING PAWNSHOP, INC.


v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Land Bank of the Philippines v. Heirs of Angel T. Domingo, G.R. No. 168553, February
4, 2008, 543 SCRA 627, 639.
416 Phil. 473 (2001), citing Land Bank of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, 321 SCRA
629 (1999).
40

Supra note 37, at 452.

G.R. No. 171253 - LAKEVIEW GOLD AND COUNTRY


CLUB, INC. v. LUZVIMIN SAMAHANG NAYON, ET AL.
G.R. No. 171536 - APRIL JOY ASETRE, ET AL. v. JUNEL
ASETRE, ET AL.
G.R. No. 171636 - NORMAN A. GAID v. PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES

Ads by Google
Ads by Google
Ads by Google

Court Cases Court Law Court View Water Court


Court View Water Court Law GR Law Judge
Water Court Law GR Law Judge Finding Law
Back to Home | Back to Main

G.R. No. 171735 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.


ALEJO OBLIGADO Y MAGDARAOG
G.R. No. 172123 - MACARIOLA G. BARTOLO AND
VIOLENDA
B.
SUCRO
v.
THE
HONORABLE
SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.
G.R. No. 172601
PAWNSHOP
AND
FLORETE, JR.

- AILEEN
JEWELRY

G. HERIDA v. F4C
STORE/MARCELINO

G.R. No. 172602 - HENRY T. GO. v. THE FIFTH


DIVISION, SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.
G.R. No. 172607 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
v. RUFINO UMANITO
G.R. No. 172671 - MARISSA R. UNCHUAN v. ANTONIO
J.P. LOZADA, ANITA LOZADA AND THE REGISTER OF
DEEDS OF CEBU CITY
G.R. No. 172832 - ROSARIO T. DE VERA v. GEREN A.
DE VERA
G.R. No. 172854 - ADAM B. GARCIA v. NLRC (SECOND
DIVISION) LEGAZPI OIL COMPANY, INC. ROMEO F.
MERCADO AND GUS ZULUAGA
G.R. No. 173115 & 173163-64 - ATTY. VIRGILIO R.
GARCIA
v.
EASTERN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
PHILIPPINES,
INC.
ET
AL./EASTERN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PHILIPPINES INC. v. ATTY.
VIRGILIO R. GARCIA

QUICK SEARCH

1901

1902

1903

1904

1905

1906

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

1915

1916

1917

1918

1919

1920

1921

1922

1923

1924

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

1940

1941

1942

1943

1944

1945

1946

1947

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

G.R. No. 173210 - REPUBIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v.


MACARIA L. TUASTUMBAN
G.R. No. 173588 - ARIEL M. LOS BA OS, ON BEHALF
OF P/SUPT. VICTOR AREVALO, SP02 MARCIAL
OLYMPIA, SP01 ROCKY MERCENE AND P01 RAUL
ADLAWAN AND IN HIS PERSONAL CAPACITY v. JOEL R.
PEDRO
G.R. No. 173637 - DANTE TAN v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES.
G.R. No. 173791 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
PABLO AMODIA
G.R. No. 173807 - JAIME U. GUSICAO v. LETECIA

Main Indices of the Library --->

Go!

CHING AND EDWIN CASTA


G.R. No. 173834 - ISABELITA CUNANAN, CAROLYN
CUNANAN AND CARMENCITA F. NEMOTO v. JUMPING
JAP TRADING CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY
REUBEN M. PROTACIO
G.R. No. 173931 - ALICIA D. TAGARO v. ESTER A.
GARCIA, ETC.
G.R. No. 174105 - Reghis M. Romero II, et al. v. Sen.
Jinggoy E. Estrada, et al.
G.R. No. 175320 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
ERNESTO PE A Y SARMIENTO
G.R. No. 175945 Formerly G.R. NOS. 153211-12 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. LOLITO HONOR Y
ALIGWAY, ET AL.
G.R. No. 175983 - METROPOLITAN CEBU WATER
DESTRICT v. J. KING AND SONS COMPANY, INC
G.R. No. 176348 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
DIONISIO CABUDBOD Y TUTOR AND EDGAR CABUDBOD
Y LACROA
G.R. No. 176531 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
ROMEO BANDIN
G.R. No. 176566 - ELISEO EDUARTE Y COSCOLLA v.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 177163 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
ALEX BALAGAT
G.R. No. 177187 - SPOUSES JUANITO R. VILLAMIL
ETC. ET AL. v. LAZARO CRUZ-VILLAROSA
G.R. No. 177210 - SUMMA KUMAGAI, INC-KUMAGAI,
GUMI CO. LTD JOINT VENTURE v. ROMAGO, INC.
G.R. No. 177220 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
RUBEN ROBLES
G.R. No. 177283 - DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY, ET AL. v.
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
(DLSUEA-NAFTEU)
G.R. No. 177302 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
JAIME LOPEZ, ET AL.
G.R. NO. 177333 : April 24, 2009 - PHILIPPINE
AMUSEMENT AND GAMING CORPORATION (PAGCOR)
represented by ATTY. CARLOS R. BAUTISTA, JR., v.
PHILIPPINE GAMING JURISDICTION INCORPORATED
(PEJI), ZAMBOANGA CITY SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE
AUTHORITY, et al.
G.R. No. 177346 - GUILLERMO PERCIANO v. HEIRS
OF PROCOPIO TUMBALI REPRESENTED BY LYDIA
TUMBALI
G.R. No. 177961 - LOURDES A. SABLE v. PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL.
G.R. No. 178127 - VIRGEN SHIPPING CORPORATION,
ET AL. v. JESUS B. BARRAQUIO
G.R. No. 178301 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
ROLANDO MALIBIRAN, BEVERLY TIBO-TARO
G.R. No. 178453 - GLORIA ARTIAGA v. SILIMAN
UNIVERSITY AND SILIMAN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL
CENTER
G.R. No. 178678 - DR. HANS CHRISTIAN M. SE ERES
v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND MELQUIADES A.
ROBLES
G.R. No. 178763 - PETER PAUL PATRICK LUCAS, ET
AL. v. DR. PROSPERO MA. C. TUA O
G.R. NOS. 178831-32, 179120, 179132-33 and
179240-41 - JOCELYN SY LIMKAICHONG v. COMELEC,
ET AL.
G.R. NO. 178873 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
ILLUSTRE LLAGAS A.K.A. NONOY LLAGAS
G.R. No. 179255 - National Transmission Corp. v.
Venusto D. Hamoy, Jr.
G.R. No. 179563 - BACOLOD-TALISAY REALTY AND
DEVELOPMENT CORP., ET AL. v. ROMEO DELA CRUZ
G.R. No. 179271 and G.R. NO. 179295 - BARANGAY
ASSOCIATION FOR NATIONAL ADVANCEMENT AND
TRANSPARENCY
(BANAT)
v.
COMMISSION
ON
ELECTIONS/ BAYAN MUNA, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONS
G.R. No. 179708 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
ROGELIO ALETA, MARIO ALETA AND JOVITO ALETA
G.R. No. 179933 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
JOSEPH FABITO

G.R. No. 179955 - JOSE SY BANG (DECEASED), ET AL.


v. ROSARIO SY (DECEASED), ET AL.
G.R. No. 180046 - Review Center Associations of the
Philippines v. Executive Secretatry Eduardo Ermita, et
al.
G.R. No. 179987 - HEIRS OF MARIO MALABANAN v.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 180165 - METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST
COMPANY v. HON. SEC OF JUSTICE RAUL M. GONZALES,
ET AL.
G.R. No. 180314 - NORMALLAH A. PACASUM v.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 180363 - EDGAR Y. TEVES v. THE
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND HERMINIO G. TEVES
G.R.
No.
180640
HUTAMA-RSEA
JOINT
OPERATIONS,
INC.
v.
CITRA
METRO
MANILA
TOLLWAYS CORPORATION
G.R. No. 180892 - UST FACULTY UNION v.
UNIVERSITY OF STO. TOMAS, REV. FR. ROLANDO DE LA
ROSA, REV FR. RODELIO ALIGAN, DOMINGO LEGASPI,
AND MERECEDES HINAYON
G.R. NO. 180923 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
v. SOLOMON DIONEDA Y DELA CRUZ
G.R. No. 181295 - Harlin
Commission on Elections, et al.

Castillo

Abayon

v.

G.R. No. 181318 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.


GERMAN AGOJO Y LUNA
G.R. No. 181377 and G.R. NO. 181726 - RODANTE
MARCOLETA, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET
AL./ ALAGAD PARTY-LIST REPRESENTED BY DIOGENES
S.
OSABEL,
PRESIDENT
v.
COMMISSION
ON
ELECTIONS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 181475 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
LARRY "LAURO" DOMINGO Y CRUZ
G.R. No. 182231 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
EDDIE GUM-OYEN Y SACPA
G.R. No. 182296 - SUSAN SALES Y JIMENA v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES.
G.R. No. 182790 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
CESAR CANTALEJO Y MANLANGIT
G.R. NOS. 182978-79 and G.R. NOS. 184298-99 BECMEN SERVICES EXPORTER AND PROMOTION, INC.
v. SPS. SIMPLICIO AND MILA CUARESMA, ET AL./SPS.
SIMPLICIO AND MILA CUARESMA v. WHITE FALCON
SERVICES, INC., ET AL.
G.R. NO. 183232 - GILBERT DELA PAZ v. MARIKINA
FOOTWEAR
DEVELOPMENT
COOPERATIVE,
INC.,
(MAFODECO), REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
RODOLFO DE GUZMAN
G.R. No. 183278 - IMELDA O. COJUANGCO, PRIME
HOLDINGS, INC., AND THE ESTATE OF RAMON U.
COJUANGCO v. SANDIGANBAYAN, REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES AND THE SHERIFF OF SANDIGANBAYAN
G.R. No. 183565 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
EDUARDO ABOGANDA
G.R. No. 183905 and G.R. NO. 184275 - GOVERNMENT
SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM v. THE HON. COURT OF
APPEALS, ET AL. / SEC, ET AL. v. ANTHONY ROSETE, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 184174 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
REYNALDO CAPALAD
G.R. No. 184791 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
PEDRO NOGPO, JR. A.K.A. "TANDODOY"
G.R. No. 185132 - GOV. ENRIQUE T. GARCIA, JR., ET
AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 185162 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
ROLLY GIDOC @ BAYENG

Copyright 1998 - 20161998 - 2016 ChanRobles Publishing Company

| Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions

ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

| chanrobles.com

RED

Вам также может понравиться