Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Search
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2015 > August 2015 Decisions > G.R. No. 198751, August 19,
2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent.:
Custom Search
Search G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO,
Respondent.
SECOND DIVISION
DECISION
BRION, J.:
We resolve the present petition for review on certiorari1 assailing the February 18, 2011 Decision2 and
August 31, 2011 Resolution3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) Cebu City, in CA-G.R. SP No. 03230.
Factual Antecedents
In 2004, respondent Andres D. Egano, together with his spouse Tarcelita, filed with the Department of
Agrarian Reform Regional Office (DARRO), Region VIII, Tacloban City, a "Petition for Nullification of
Coverage and Disqualification of Farmer-Beneficiary." They contested the issuance of Certificate of Land
Ownership Award (CLOA) to and identification as farmer-beneficiaries of petitioner Flor Cañas-Manuel
and her sister, Salome D. Cañas, of Lot 3595, Csd. 726-D situated in Barangay Palarao, Leyte, Leyte. He
alleged that CLOA No. 00091138 was mistakenly issued to the petitioner and Salome because a portion
(an area of 3,655.50 sq.ms. more or less) of the land covered by the said CLOA was previously sold to
him by the petitioner's father, Celedonio Cañas.4 Also, he alleged that the petitioner and Salome were
not qualified as farmer-beneficiaries because they were not the actual tillers of the subject portion of
land.
DebtKollect Company, Inc.
In an Order5 dated October 28, 2004, DAR Regional Director Tiburcio A. Morales, Jr. found merit in the
respondent's petition and issued the following: cralawlawlibrary
"WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Nullification of Coverage under CARP
of the portion of lot 3595, situated in Brgy. Palarao, Leyte, Leyte, and Disqualification of its
identified Farmer-Beneficiary filed by petitioners (referring to the respondent and his wife)
is hereby GRANTED and Order is hereby issued;
1. DECLARING the award in favor of Flor Cañas Manuel and Salome Dellera Cañas of the
farmlot embraced by CLOA No. 00091138 null and void ab initio;
3. ORDERING the MARO, DAR Municipal Office of Leyte, Leyte, to identify and document
petitioners as the rightful farmer beneficiaries of such portion, subject of this petition;
ChanRobles Intellectual Property 4. ORDERING the Petitioners to coordinate with the Legal Division of DARPO,
Leyte to file the proper petition with the Adjudication Board for the Cancellation
Division of CLOA No. 00091138."6 (Emphasis supplied)
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 1/8
1/23/2019 G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. : AUGUST 2015 - PHILIP…
The petitioner moved to reconsider Dir. Morales's order but her motion was denied.7 cralawrednad
The October 28, 2004 order of Dir. Morales later became final and executory as no appeal was filed
within the remainder of the fifteen (15)-day filing period.8
cralawrednad
Pursuant to Dir. Morales's order to coordinate his case with the Legal Division of the Department of
Agrarian Reform Provincial Office (DARPO) Leyte, the respondent, on January 24, 2005, filed a "Petition
for Cancellation of CLOA No. 00091138" with the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB)-Region VIII. This was docketed as DARAB Case No. R-0800-0042-05.
In a decision9 dated February 16, 2006, Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD) Wilfredo M.
Navarra ordered the cancellation of CLOA No. 00091138 and its corresponding Original Certificate of Title
(OCT) No. 3324 based on Dir. Morales's October 28, 2004 order. The petitioner moved to reconsider
PARAD Navarra's decision but her motion was denied in a resolution10 dated May 8, 2006. The petitioner
filed an appeal with the DARAB Central Office in Diliman, Quezon City. This was docketed as DARAB Case
No. 14579.
In a decision11 dated May 29, 2007, the DARAB dismissed the petitioner's appeal, in this wise: cralawlawlibrary
"The appeal is without merit. The cancellation of CLOA No. 00091138 under Original
Certificate of Title No. 3324 was an offshoot of the Decision dated October 28,
2004, rendered by the Regional Director of Region VIII, in the case entitled "In Re:
Petition for Nullification of Coverage and Disqualification of Farmer-Beneficiary," filed by
petitioner (referring to the present respondent). As correctly stated by the Adjudicator a
quo: "Thus, the declaration of Dir. Tiburcio A. Morales, Jr., regarding the disqualification of
Flor Manuel Cafias and Salome D. Cafias as farmer-beneficiaries, is an exercise of an
authority of the DAR Secretary that has been delegated to him. The cancellation of the
subject CLOA is a necessary consequence of that declaration which binds this
office, being an adjunct of the DAR. xxx And in the meantime that the off-
mentioned Order of Dir. Tiburcio Morales, has not been vacated or ordered
vacated by an appropriate authority, it is incumbent upon this Office to honor the
same."12 (emphases supplied)
The DARAB, likewise, denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration in a resolution13 dated October
9, 2007. The petitioner appealed her case to the CA through a Petition for Review filed under Rule 43 of
the Rules of Court.
August-2015 Jurisprudence In the decision now assailed before this Court,14 the CA affirmed in toto the DARAB's decision in DARAB
Case No. 14579, stating that: cralawlawlibrary
"As correctly enunciated by DAR Provincial Adjudicator Wilfredo M. Navarra, the objections
G.R. No. 197709, August 03, 2015 - JOSE YULO of herein petitioner to the cancellation of the subject CLOA as the same is a violation of
AGRICULTURAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. their right to due process, the illegality of the sale of the land, the irregularity of the
SPOUSES PERLA CABAYLO DAVIS AND SCOTT DAVIS,
certificate of finality, etc., cannot be entertained by the DARAB because these are
Respondents.
questions related to the administrative implementation of agrarian laws which are beyond
G.R. No. 200969, August 03, 2015 - CONSOLACION the DARAB's jurisdiction. DARAB has no appellate jurisdiction over acts of DAR
D. ROMERO AND ROSARIO S.D. DOMINGO, Regional Directors, thus, petitioners (sic) should have addressed their concerns
Petitioners, v. ENGRACIA D. SINGSON, Respondent. to the DAR Secretary. xxx
G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 2015 - JUAN PONCE xxx xxx xxx
ENRILE, Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN (THIRD
DIVISION), AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, xxx it is clear that the DARAB did not err in ruling against herein petitioner as it has no
Respondents. authority to grant the reliefs she has prayed for. Moreover, it cannot be argued that
Section 1(f) of the Rules vests the DARAB with jurisdiction over cases involving the
A.C. No. 8708 (CBD Case No. 08-2192), August 12, issuance of Certificates of Land Transfer (CLT) and the administrative correction thereof,
2015 - SPOUSES BYRON AND MARIA LUISA
as it has been ruled that for the DARAB to exercise jurisdiction in such cases,
SAUNDERS, Complainants, v. ATTY. LYSSA GRACE S.
PAGANO-CALDE, Respondent. there must be an agrarian dispute between the landowner and the tenant which
is not so in the instant case."15 (Emphases supplied and citations omitted)
G.R. No. 177803, August 03, 2015 - SPOUSES
EMILIANO L. JALBAY, SR. AND MAMERTA C. JALBAY, In its August 31, 2011 resolution, the CA denied the motion for reconsideration filed by the petitioner;
Petitioners, v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, hence, the petitioner's filing of the present petition for review on certiorari with this Court.
Respondent.
The Petition
G.R. No. 201365, August 03, 2015 - THE PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MANUELA The petitioner assails the CA's decision for denying his petition for review based on purely technical
FLORES Y SALAZAR @ WELLA Accused-Appellant. reasons and ignoring the crucial, substantive issues she presented in her appeal. She contends that the
CA committed reversible error when it ruled that the October 28, 2004 order of Dir. Morales could no
G.R. No. 198908, August 03, 2015 - VIRGINIA
longer be disturbed, and argues that the said order cannot attain finality because it is illegal, null and
OCAMPO, Petitioner, v. DEOGRACIO OCAMPO,
Respondent. void.
G.R. No. 195175, August 10, 2015 - The petitioner claims: that, in May 1985, she was identified as a qualified farmer-beneficiary of a 3,895
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, sq.m.-farm lot in Brgy. Palarao, Leyte, Leyte, originally owned by her parents Celedonio and Floriana
v. TOLEDO POWER COMPANY, Respondent.; G.R. NO. Cañas, and designated as Lot No. 3592, Cad. 726-D; that, on November 17, 1986, the lot's Survey
199645 - TOLEDO POWER COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Plan was approved after a survey conducted on the property in December 1985; that, on May 31, 1993,
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. she was issued a Certificate of Land Ownership Award No. 00091138 and Original Certificate of
Title (OCT) No. OC- 3324, embodied in one (1) document that was registered with the Register of
G.R. No. 213233, August 05, 2015 - BLISS Deeds, Province of Leyte, on June 30, 1993; and that she had been cultivating the land and paying the
DEVELOPMENT CORP./HOME GUARANTY
taxes due on the property ever since.16 Thus, the petitioner firmly insists that the October 28, 2004
CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. MONTANO DIAZ,
DOMINGO TAPAY, AND EDGAR H. ARREZA, order of Dir. Morales, which was adopted by the DARAB (Region VIII and Central Offices) and later
Respondents. sustained by the CA, was erroneous and patently illegal for the reasons outlined below: ChanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
G.R. No. 197953, August 05, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE Procedurally, the filing of the respondent's petition for nullification of coverage (and disqualification of
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN (2ND farmer-beneficiary) with the DARRO was already barred by prescription as it was filed after the lapse of
DIVISION), QUINTIN SALUDAGA Y BORDEOS, eleven (11) years since the registration of CLOA No. 00091138 with the Register of Deeds. The
ARTHUS ADRIATICO Y ERUDA AND ROMEO DE LUNA, respondent's petition too, was a prohibited collateral attack on her title over the subject property.
Respondents.
On substantive issues, the subject portion of land purportedly sold by the petitioner's father to the
G.R. No. 187524, August 05, 2015 - SPOUSES respondent is not the actual lot referred to in the petitioner's CLOA. CLOA No. 00091138 issued to the
MARIA BUTIONG AND FRANCISCO VILLAFRIA, petitioner covered Lot No. 3592, and not Lot No. 3595 as claimed by the respondent.
SUBSTITUTED BY DR. RUEL B. VILLAFRIA, Petitioners,
v. MA. GRACIA RIÑOZA PLAZO AND MA. FE RIÑOZA
ALARAS, Respondents. Also, Dir. Morales exceeded his authority when he ruled that the respondent had validly acquired
ownership over the subject portion of Lot No. 3595 from the petitioner's parents, as the authority to rule
G.R. No. 209447, August 11, 2015 - PRESIDENTIAL on the issue of the lot's ownership rests with the courts of law.
COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT (PCGG),
Petitioner, v. HON. WINLOVE M. DUMAYAS, Lastly, even assuming that the alleged sale between the respondent and the petitioner's father had
PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH actually transpired, the sale of the subject portion of Lot No. 3595 to the respondent was a prohibited act
59, MAKATI CITY AND UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS under Section 73(e)17 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 665718 and, thus, cannot serve as the basis for the
BANK (UCPB), Respondents.; G.R. NO. 210901 - petitioner's disqualification as farmer-beneficiary and for the cancellation of CLOA No. 00091138 and OCT
PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT No. OC-3324 issued to the petitioner.
(PCGG), Petitioner, v. HON. WINLOVE M. DUMAYAS,
PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH
59, MAKATI CITY AND UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS The petitioner further contends that even the filing of the respondent's petition for cancellation of the
CLOA with the DARAB was also time-barred and that said petition, likewise, constituted a prohibited
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 2/8
1/23/2019 G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. : AUGUST 2015 - PHILIP…
LIFE ASSURANCE CORPORATION (COCOLIFE), collateral attack to her certificate of title.
Respondents.
In a resolution19 dated November 14, 2011, this Court required the respondent to file his comment.
G.R. No. 188739, August 05, 2015 - BENJAMIN E.
RAVAGO, Petitioner, v. METROPOLITAN BANK &
TRUST COMPANY, SUBSTITUTED BY BRIGHT In his comment,20 the respondent counter-argues that the present petition for review on certiorari
VENTURES REALTY, INC., Respondents. suffers a procedural infirmity that warrants its outright dismissal. He claims that the petitioner failed to
furnish him copies of the annexes mentioned in his petition, particularly pertaining to copies of the
G.R. No. 215714, August 12, 2015 - OF THE October 28, 2004 order of Dir. Morales, and the decisions of PARAD Navarra and the DARAB Central
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EFREN BASAL Office.21 He posits that the October 28, 2004 order of Dir. Morales is a legal and binding order, which
CAYAS, Accused-Appellant. had already become final and executory and thus could no longer be reviewed.
A.M. No. 11238-Ret., August 18, 2015 - IN RE:
EXPIRATION OF FIXED TERM OF OFFICE OF ATTY. The petitioner, in his reply22 to the respondent's comment, denies that the respondent was not furnished
SAADUDDIN A. ALAUYA, OFFICE OF THE copies of the annexes of her petition. She alleges that, in any case, the annexes to the present petition
JURISCONSULT, ZAMBOANGA CITY were the same attachments to her petition for review with the C A, of which the respondent was
previously furnished copies.
G.R. No. 167838, August 05, 2015 - JOSE V.
TOLEDO, GLENN PADIERNOS AND DANILO OUR RULING
PADIERNOS, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS,
LOURDES RAMOS, ENRIQUE RAMOS, ANTONIO We find MERIT in the petition.
RAMOS, MILAGROS RAMOS AND ANGELITA RAMOS AS
HEIRS OF SOCORRO RAMOS, GUILLERMO PABLO, While a Rule 45 petition must generally be confined to questions of law, we shall resolve the present
PRIMITIVA CRUZ AND A.R.C. MARKETING
petition, which substantially raises questions of fact as we find glaring procedural and substantive errors
CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,
ALBERTO C. DY, Respondents. committed and overlooked by the DARAB and the CA in this case. Thus, we find it imperative to review
the facts of the case and the proceedings before the DARAB, including those before the DARRO.
A.C. No. 10635, August 26, 2015 - NOEL S.
SORREDA, Complainant, v. ATTY. DAVID L. KHO, We recall that the respondent's petition before the DARRO was denominated as a "petition for
Respondent. nullification of coverage (from the CARP) and disqualification as farmer-beneficiary" of the petitioner and
her sister Salome over Lot No. 3595, csd. 726-D, and included, in the respondent's prayer for reliefs, the
A.M. No. P-14-3253, August 19, 2015 - NICETAS cancellation of CLOA No. 00091138 for being null and void.23 cralawrednad
G.R. No. 206220, August 19, 2015 - LUIS UY, On January 24, 2005, almost three (3) months after Dir. Morales's order was issued, the respondent filed
SUBSTITUTED BY LYDIA UY VELASQUEZ AND SHIRLEY a petition to cancel CLOA No. 00091138 with the DARAB Region VIII. The petition was referred to and
UY MACARAIG, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES JOSE decided upon by PARAD Wilfredo M. Navarra.
LACSAMANA AND ROSAURA* MENDOZA,
SUBSTITUTED BY CORAZON BUENA, Respondents. In the proceedings before the PARAD, the petitioner filed objections to the cancellation of her CLOA, and
raised issues such as the denial of her right to due process, the illegality of the sale between her father
G.R. No. 214865, August 19, 2015 - ROSVEE C. and the respondent, among others. However, the petitioner's objections were not addressed because,
CELESTIAL, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE according to PARAD Navarra, "these are questions related to the administrative implementation of
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
agrarian laws which are beyond the DARAB's jurisdiction."25 cralawredcralawrednad
Respondent.
Section 6. Referral of cases. When a party erroneously files a case under Section 2
G.R. No. 174542, August 03, 2015 - KAREN GO, hereof before the DARAB, the receiving official shall refer the case to the proper
Petitioner, v. LAMBERTO ECHAVEZ, Respondent. DAR office for appropriate action within five (5) working days after determination that
said case is within the jurisdiction of the Secretary. Likewise, when a party erroneously
G.R. No. 196875, August 19, 2015 - TEDDY files a case under Section 3 hereof before any office other than the DARAB or its
MARAVILLA, Petitioner, v. JOSEPH RIOS, Respondent.
adjudicators, the receiving official shall, within five (5) working days, refer the case to the
G.R. No. 205113, August 26, 2015 - HONORLITA
DARAB or its adjudicators, (Emphasis supplied)
ASCANO-CUPINO AND FLAVIANA ASCANO-
COLOCADO, Petitioners, v. PACIFIC REHOUSE The next question for resolution is whether the PARAD correctly considered the respondent's case as an
CORPORATION, Respondent. agrarian law implementation case cognizable by the DAR.
G.R. No. 205823, August 17, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE Under Section 134 of the 2003 DARAB Rules of Procedure, the Rules applicable to the petition for
PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. REGIE BREIS Y ALVARADO cancellation of CLOA filed by the respondent, the DARAB and its Adjudicators have jurisdiction over cases
AND GARY YUMOL Y TUAZON,* Appellants. involving the correction, partition, cancellation, secondary and subsequent issuances of Certificates of
Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) and Emancipation Patents (EPs) which are registered with the Land
G.R. No. 198643, August 19, 2015 - MARSMAN & Registration Authority.
COMPANY AND QUIRINO R. ILEDAN, Petitioners, v.
ARTEMIO M. LIGO, Respondent.
While it appears that the CLOA subject of this case has been registered with the Register of Deeds on
G.R. No. 214054, August 05, 2015 - NG MENG TAM, June 30, 1993,35 the respondent's petition for cancellation of the petitioner's CLOA does not fall within
Petitioner, v. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION, the DARAB's jurisdiction due to the absence of an agrarian dispute or tenancy relationship between the
Respondent. respondent and the petitioner. Here, both parties claim to be the owners and actual tillers of the subject
lot.
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 3/8
1/23/2019 G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. : AUGUST 2015 - PHILIP…
A.M. No. P-11-2982 (Formerly O.C.A. IPI No. 08-
2913-P), August 17, 2015 - FORMER JUDGE An agrarian dispute is defined under Section 3(d) of R.A. No. 6657 as: cralawlawlibrary
G.R. No. 190984, August 19, 2015 - ACOMARIT It includes any controversy relating to compensation of lands acquired under this Act and
ACOMARIT LIMITED, PHILS., AND/OR HONGKONG, other terms and conditions of transfer of ownership from landowners to farmworkers,
Petitioners, v. GOMER L. DOTIMAS, Respondent. tenants and other agrarian reform beneficiaries, whether the disputants stand in the
proximate relation of farm operator and beneficiary, landowner and tenant, or lessor and
G.R. No. 170706, August 26, 2015 - PRUDENCIO lessee, (Emphasis supplied)
CARANTO, Petitioner, v. BERGESEN D.Y. PHILS.
AND/OR BERGESEN D.Y. A.S.A., Respondents. We have ruled that, for the DARAB to have jurisdiction over a case, there must be an agrarian dispute or
tenancy relationship existing between the parties.36 cralawrednad
G.R. Nos. 191370-71, August 10, 2015 - RODOLFO SO ORDERED. chanrobles virtuallawlibrary
G.R. No. 165146, August 12, 2015 - SECURITIES 1Rollo, pp. 3-25.
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION AND VERNETTE G.
UMALI, Petitioners, v. BAGUIO COUNTRY CLUB
2 Penned by CA Associate Justice Edwin D. Sorongon, with Associate Justices Pampio A.
CORPORATION, Respondent.; G.R. N0. 165209 -
RAMON K. ILUSORIO AND ERLINDA K. ILUSORIO, Abarintos and Socorro B. Inting, concurring, id. at 58-66.
Petitioners, v. BAGUIO COUNTRY CLUB
CORPORATION, Respondent. 3 Id. at 91-92.
G.R. No. 203066, August 05, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE 4
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RODELIO As per notarized Deed of Absolute Sale of Real Property executed by Celedonio Q. Cañas
LLOBERA Y OFIZA, Accused-Appellant. (married to Floriana D. Cañas) and Mamerta A. Ibañez as vendors, and Andres Egano, as
vendee; Annex 11 of the Petition, id. at 104
G.R. No. 190892, August 17, 2015 - VICENTE H.
MANULAT, JR., Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE 5 Id. at 96-99.
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
6 Id. at 97 and 99.
G.R. No. 183370, August 17, 2015 - NATION
PETROLEUM GAS, INCORPORATED, NENA ANG, MARIO 7
ANG, ALISON A. SY, GUILLERMO G. SY, NELSON ANG, Id. at 8.
LUISA ANG, RENATO C. ANG, PAULINE T. ANG, RICKY
C. ANG,1 AND MELINDA ANG, Petitioners, v. RIZAL 8 As provided under Section 238 of the 2003 Rules for Agrarian Law Implementation
COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION, Cases.
SUBSTITUTED BY PHILIPPINE ASSET GROWTH ONE,
INC., Respondent. 9Rollo, pp. 6, 61.
G.R. No. 213455, August 11, 2015 - JUAN PONCE
10 Id.
ENRILE, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
HON. AMPARO M. CABOTAJE-TANG, HON. SAMUEL R.
MARTIRES, AND HON. ALEX L. QUIROZ OF THE THIRD 11 Id. at 58.
DIVISION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN, Respondents.
12 As quoted in the CA's decision; id. at 61.
G.R. No. 201405, August 24, 2015 - LIWAYWAY
ANDRES, RONNIE ANDRES, AND PABLO B.
13Rollo, p. 58.
FRANCISCO, Petitioners, v. STA. LUCIA REALTY &
DEVELOPMENT, INCORPORATED, Respondent.
14Supra note 2.
G.R. No. 153810, August 12, 2015 - WINSTON R.
GARCIA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT AND 15Rollo, p. 65.
GENERAL MANAGER OF THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE
INSURANCE SYSTEM (GSIS), Petitioners, v. ANGELITA
16 Id. at 6-7, 16-17.
TOLENTINO, EDELITO ZOLLO EDRALINDA, KATHLYN
A. UMALI, VIVIAN ROSIELLE CERVANTES, EDITH
MEDINA, ROMELO CABANGON, ET AL., Respondents.; 17 Section 73. Prohibited Acts and Omissions. — The following are prohibited: cralawlawlibrary
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 4/8
1/23/2019 G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. : AUGUST 2015 - PHILIP…
G.R. No. 200114, August 24, 2015 - SOCIAL and the date of the issuance of the tax declaration to the transferee of
SECURITY SYSTEM, Petitioner, v. DEBBIE UBAÑA, the property with respect to unregistered lands, as the case may be, shall
Respondent. be conclusive for the purpose of this Act.
(f) The sale, transfer or conveyance by a beneficiary of the right to use or
G.R. No. 177168, August 03, 2015 - NAVY any other usufructuary right over the land he acquired by virtue of being
OFFICERS' VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, INC. (NOVAI),
a beneficiary, in order to circumvent the provisions of this Act. (Emphasis
Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent. supplied)
xxx
G.R. No. 163598, August 12, 2015 - AGRARIAN
18AN ACT INSTITUTING A COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM TO PROMOTE
REFORM BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION (ARBA), AS
REPRESENTED BY ISAIAS "ACE" NICOLAS IN HIS SOCIAL JUSTICE AND INDUSTRIALIZATION, PROVIDING THE MECHANISM FOR ITS
CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT, VIOLETA BATADHAY, IMPLEMENTATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, otherwise known as the Comprehensive
JESUS F. DANAO, DOMINADOR RIOSA, EVA I. Agrarian Reform Law of 1988, approved on June 10, 1988.
FLORIDO, VIRGINIA CARIAS, WILLIAM D. DORONELA,
ELSA MENGOLIO, FEDELINA AMENGYAO, REBECCA 19Rollo, pp. 106-107.
REBAMBA, MELANI CADAG, SOFRONIA SABORDO,
MYRNA SANTIAGO, JOSELYNDA MANALANZAN, NORA 20
I. REBUZANO, NATIVIDAD PLACIDO, ALGERICO L. Dated February 6, 2012, rollo, unpaged.
GAEGUERA, RUBEN G. ACEBEDO, MARGIE M. VALDEZ,
HELEN S. BUNI, EMELINDA FERNANDEZ, JULIETA J. 21 Respondent's comment, id., unpaged.
AVENGONZA, VIOLETA C. ASIS, CARINA C. CABRERA,
EDUARDO M. DILAY, SIMEONA V. ROLEDA, EVELYN 22 Dated February 17, 2012, rollo, unpaged.
SANTO ELEUTERIA A. NOLASCO, TERESA CRUZ, MELBA
ABRENICA, BESAME VILLACORTA, ROSALINA 23Supra
HERNANDEZ, VERONICA DOMULOT, LUCIA SOUN, note 6.
ILUMENADA RONQUILLO, REGINA LOPEZ, AMPARO
GREY, HIPOLITO MANDAO, JUAN DELA VEGA, 24Rollo, pp. 97-98.
PRESCILIANA LLEMIT, LEBERETA IGNACIO,
FRANCISCO VALDEMOR, Petitioners, v. FIL-ESTATE 25 Supra note 15.
INC., PROPERTIES, Respondent.; G.R. NO. 164660 -
cralawred
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 5/8
1/23/2019 G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. : AUGUST 2015 - PHILIP…
CLAUDIO, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES FEDERICO AND 33Supra note 30.
NORMA SARAZA, Respondent.
34 SECTION 1. Primary and Exclusive Original Jurisdiction. - The Adjudicator shall have
G.R. No. 200295, August 19, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDGAR BOLO Y primary and exclusive original jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate the following
FRANCO, Accused-Appellant. cases:cralawlawlibrary
G.R. No. 209331, August 24, 2015 - DEPARTMENT 1.1. The rights and obligations of persons, whether natural or juridical,
OF FINANCE, REPRESENTED BY HON. CESAR V. engaged in the management, cultivation, and use of all agricultural
PURISIMA IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS lands covered by Republic Act (RA) No. 6657, otherwise known as the
SECRETARY, AND THE BUREAU OF CUSTOMS, Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), and other related
REPRESENTED BY HON. ROZZANO RUFINO B. BIAZON, agrarian laws;
IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF 1.2. The preliminary administrative determination of reasonable and just
CUSTOMS, Petitioners, v. HON. MARINO M. DELA compensation of lands acquired under Presidential Decree (PD) No. 27
CRUZ, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE JUDGE, and the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program;
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MANILA, HON. FELICITAS O. 1.3. The annulment or cancellation of lease contracts or deeds of sale or
LARON-CACANINDIN, IN HER CAPACITY AS
their amendments involving lands under the administration and
PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT,
MANILA, BRANCH 17, RONNIE C. SILVESTRE, disposition of the DAR or Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP);
EDWARD P. DELA CUESTA, ROGEL C. GATCHALIAN, 1.4. Those cases involving the ejectment and dispossession of tenants
IMELDA D.CRUZ, LILIBETH S. SANDAG, RAYMOND P. and/or leaseholders;
VENTURA, MA. LIZA S. TORRES, ARNEL C. ALCARAZ, 1.5. Those cases involving the sale, alienation, pre-emption, and
MA. LOURDES V. MANGAOANG, FRANCIS AGUSTIN Y. redemption of agricultural lands under the coverage of the CARL or
ERPE, CARLOS T. SO, MARIETTA D. ZAMORANOS, other agrarian laws;
CARMELITA M. TALUSAN,1] AREFILES H. CARREON,2] 1.6. Those involving the correction, partition, cancellation,
AND ROMALINO G. VALDEZ, Respondents. secondary and subsequent issuances of Certificates of Land
Ownership Award (CLOAs) and Emancipation Patents (EPs)
A.C. No. 6738, August 12, 2015 - GABRIELA which are registered with the Land Registration Authority;
CORONEL, Petitioner, v. ATTY. NELSON A. CUNANAN,
1.7. Those cases involving the review of leasehold rentals;
Respondent.
1.8. Those cases involving the collection of amortizations on payments for
G.R. No. 170671, August 19, 2015 - FILADELFA T. lands awarded under PD No. 27, as amended, RA No. 3844, as
LAUSA, LORETA T. TORRES, PRIMITIVO TUGOT AND amended, and RA No. 6657, as amended, xxx;
ANACLETO T. CADUHAY, Petitioners, v. MAURICIA 1.9. Those cases involving the annulment or rescission of lease contracts
QUILATON, RODRIGO Q. TUGOT, PURIFICACION T. and deeds of sale, and the cancellation or amendment of titles
CODILLA, TEOFRA T. SADAYA, ESTRELLITA T. GALEOS pertaining to agricultural lands under the administration and disposition
AND ROSITA T. LOPEZ, Respondents. of the DAR and LBP, xxx;
1.10.Those cases involving boundary disputes over lands under the
G.R. No. 202322, August 19, 2015 - LIGHT RAIL administration and disposition of the DAR and the LBP, xxx;
TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. ROMULO S. 1.11.Those cases involving the determination of title to agricultural lands
MENDOZA, FRANCISCO S. MERCADO, ROBERTO M. where the issue is raised in an agrarian dispute by any of the parties or
REYES, EDGARDO CRISTOBAL, JR., AND RODOLFO a third person in connection with the possession thereof xxx;
ROMAN, Respondents.
1.12.Those cases previously falling under the original and exclusive
G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS- jurisdiction of the defunct Court of Agrarian Relations under Section 12
MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, of PD No. 946 xxx; and
Respondent. 1.13.Such other agrarian cases, disputes, matters or concerns referred to it
by the Secretary of the DAR. (Emphasis supplied)
G.R. No. 181111, August 17, 2015 - JACKSON xxxx
PADIERNOS Y QUEJADA, JACKIE ROXAS Y GERMAN
AND ROLANDO MESINA Y JAVATE, Petitioners, v. 35 Attached to the Rollo is a certified true copy of OCT No. OC-3324 pertaining to the
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. award of a 3,895 sq.m.-lot in Barangay Palarao, Municipality of Leyte, Province of Leyte, to
Flor Cañas-Manuel, et.al. under CLOA No. 0001138, issued on May 31, 1993, and
G.R. No. 202645, August 05, 2015 - FORTUNATO R. registered with the Registry of Deeds of the Province of Leyte on June 30, 1993; rollo, p.
BARON, MANOLO B. BERSABAL, AND RECTO A. 93.
MELENDRES, Petitioners, v. EPE TRANSPORT, INC.
AND/OR ERNESTO P. ENRIQUEZ, Respondents. 36 See Charles Bumagat, et al. v. Regalado Arribay, G.R. No. 194818, June 9, 2014; Del
G.R. No. 211263, August 05, 2015 - OKS Monte Philippines, Inc. Employees Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative (DEARBC) v.
DESIGNTECH, INC. REPRESENTED BY ZAMBY O. Jesus Sangunay, et al., 656 Phil. 97 (2011); Heirs of Rafael Magpily v. De Jesus, 511 Phil.
PONGAD, Petitioner, v. MARY JAYNE L. CACCAM, 14 (2005).
Respondent.
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 6/8
1/23/2019 G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. : AUGUST 2015 - PHILIP…
G.R. No. 169385, August 26, 2015 - TEOFILO
GIANGAN, SANTOS BONTIA (DECEASED), AND
LIBERATO DUMAIL (DECEASED), Petitioners, v.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 7/8
1/23/2019 G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL, Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. : AUGUST 2015 - PHILIP…
G.R. No. 169710, August 19, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. JOSE ALBERTO ALBA,
REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, MANUEL
C. BLANCO, JR., Respondent.
Copyright © 1998 - 2019 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2015augustdecisions.php?id=674 8/8