G.R. No. 175080 - EUGENIO R. REYES, JOINED BY TIMOTHY JOSEPH M. REYES, MA. GRACIA S. REYES, ROMAN GABRIEL M. REYES, AND MA. ANGELA S. REYES, VS. LIBRADA F. MAURICIO (DECEASED) AND LEONIDA F. MAURICIO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of plaintiff Librada Mauricio and against defendant Eugenio R. Reyes and order is hereby issued: Declaring the kasunduan null and void; Ordering defendant to respect the peaceful possession of herein plaintiff Librada Mauricio over the subject landholding; Ordering plaintiff to return the amount of P50,000.00 to herein defendant; No pronouncement as to costs. [6] On appeal, two issues were presented to and taken up by the DARAB, namely: (1) Whether or not there is tenancy relation between the parties; and (2) whether or not the Kasunduan dated 28 September 1994 is valid and enforceable. The DARAB held that the Mauricio's are former tenants of Spouses Reyes. It found that when Spouses Reyes died, siblings Eufracia, Susana and Eugenio, among others inherited the subject property. Under the law, they were subrogated to the rights and substituted to the "obligations" of their late parents as the agricultural lessors over the farmholding tenanted by respondents. Moreover, the DARAB banked on the Kasunduang Buwisan sa Sakahan or the leasehold contract executed by Susana in favor of Godofredo to support the tenancy relationship. Furthermore, the DARAB declared the other Kasunduan as void by relying on the evaluation of the Provincial Adjudicator as to the legal incapacity of Librada to enter into such a contract. [7] Eugenio filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied by the DARAB on 28 September 2004. [8] Aggrieved by the DARAB ruling, Eugenio filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals. On 10 July 2006, the Court of Appeals issued a resolution regarding the status of Leonida as a legal heir and allowed her to substitute Librada, who died during the pendency of the case. [9] On 10 August 2006, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision and resolution of the DARAB. It sustained the factual findings of the DARAB with respect to the tenancy relation between Godofredo and Spouses Reyes and the nullity of the Kasunduan . [10] Undaunted, Eugenio filed the instant petition. Eugenio submits that no tenancy relationship exists between him and respondents. He insists that the Kasunduang Buwisan sa Sakahan allegedly executed between Godofredo and Susana in 1993 giving the former the right to occupy and cultivate the subject property is unenforceable against Eugenio, having been entered into without his knowledge and consent. Eugenio further asserts that per records of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), no leasehold contract was entered into by Godofredo and Eugenio with respect to the disputed property. Eugenio attributes error on the part of the Court of Appeals in concluding that a tenancy relationship existed between the parties despite the absence of some of the essential requisites of a tenancy relationship such as personal cultivation and the subject land being agricultural. Finally, Eugenio defends the validity of the Kasunduan entered into between him and Lib