Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, premises considered, Order is hereby issued cancelling Order of Award dated May 25, 1972 issued in favor of Jose Verdillo for Lot 1932 (pt.) and Lot 1904, Psd-52045, Buenavista Estate, for violation of the rules and regulations pertaining to the disposition of lots in landed estates and forfeiting whatever payments made by him on account thereof in favor of the government.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, Order is hereby issued cancelling Order of Award dated May 25, 1972 issued in favor of Jose Verdillo for Lot 1932 (pt.) and Lot 1904, Psd-52045, Buenavista Estate, for violation of the rules and regulations pertaining to the disposition of lots in landed estates and forfeiting whatever payments made by him on account thereof in favor of the government. Accordingly, the subject lots are hereby declared vacant and open for disposition in favor of qualified applicant. Let the application of Restituto Rivera to purchase these lots be processed in accordance with existing rules and regulations. [5] Aggrieved by the cancellation of his award, private respondent then filed on March 20, 1994, a Petition with the Provincial Adjudication Board, Region III, for Annulment of said Order. Instead of filing an Answer to the Petition, herein petitioners (as respondents below) filed a Motion to Dismiss the Petition on the ground that the proper remedy was an appeal to the Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform from the Order of the Regional Director, under DAR Memorandum Circular No. 5-87, and not by a Petition with the DARAB Provincial Adjudicator, hence, the aforesaid Order had become final and executory. The petitioners manifested that they were no longer submitting their position paper and were opting to rely solely on their Motion to Dismiss. [6] The DARAB Provincial Adjudicator, however, chose to resolve the case on the merits and on October 14, 1994, promulgated a Decision denying the petitioners Motion to Dismiss and reversing the Order of the Regional Director, thus: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, decision is hereby rendered as follows: Declaring the Order dated January 24, 1994 issued by the then public respondent null and void being contrary to public policy; Directing the Landed Estate Division, Department of Agrarian Reform, Regional Office, San Fernando, Pampanga to immediately execute the necessary deed of conveyance and/or title of the subject landholdings in favor of petitioner, JOSE VERDILLO; and Declaring the subject landholdings fully paid and all rights appurtenant thereto is vested to the herein petitioner. [7] Petitioner Rivera filed a Motion for Reconsideration from said Decision, but it was denied by the DARAB Provincial Adjudicator. [8] He then interposed an appeal before the DAR Appellate Adjudication Board (DARAB), Diliman, Quezon City. On May 2, 1996, the Board issued its decision affirming that of the Provincial Adjudicator, thus: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the appeal is hereby DENIED by affirming the decision, dated October 14, 1994 of the Hon. Adjudicator for the Province of Bulacan. Likewise, there being no cogent reason to disturb the Order of February 22, 1995, the same is hereby AFFIRMED. [9] The Petition for Review filed by herein petitioners with the Court of Appeals was denied due course and ordered dismissed, with costs against petitioner Rivera. [10] Hence, this Peti
G.R. No. 138289 - GRACIANO PALELE, VS. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, (FOURTH DIVISION) AND TOMAS SOBREVIÑAS.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 138289 -
CaseG.R. NOS. 141593-94 - MELENCIO BERBOSO AND CONCEPCION BERBOSO, VS. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, BELEN CARLOS, CORAZON CARLOS, AND JKM INTERNATIONAL.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. NOS. 141593-94 -
CaseG.R. NO. 153850 - JOVENDO DEL CASTILLO, VS. ABUNDIO ORCIGA, EMELINA ORCIGA-VOLANTE, PILAR ORCIGA CLEMENA, ADELAIDA ORCIGA GENIO, NENITA ORCIGA ELEDA, YOLANDA ORCIGA TAKASAN AND ALBERTO ORCIGA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. NO. 153850 -