Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered: Declaring [respondent] Mercedes Resultay as having succeeded [respondent] Miguel Resultay as agricultural lessee of the land in question as of the time the former suffered a stroke which paralyzed him; Dispossessing the [respondent] Basilio Cayabyab for deliberate non-payment of the 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989 lease rental of the one-half (1/2) hectare riceland portion until the filing of this complaint against him; Ordering [respondent] Federico Baniqued to…
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered: Declaring [respondent] Mercedes Resultay as having succeeded [respondent] Miguel Resultay as agricultural lessee of the land in question as of the time the former suffered a stroke which paralyzed him; Dispossessing the [respondent] Basilio Cayabyab for deliberate non-payment of the 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989 lease rental of the one-half (1/2) hectare riceland portion until the filing of this complaint against him; Ordering [respondent] Federico Baniqued to refrain from further performing farmworks on the riceland in question; Dispossessing [respondent] Mercedes Resultay from the riceland portion of the land in question which she retained after giving the one-half (1/2) hectare portion to [respondent] Basilio Cayabyab; Maintaining [respondent] Mercedes Resultay as agricultural lessee on the non-riceland portion of the land in question. [6] In support of the foregoing, the Office of the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator held that although respondent Mercedes Resultay succeeded respondent Miguel Resultay after a stroke which caused his paralysis, she did not perform the farm work on the land in question; that, for this reason, she hired respondent Federico Baniqued to work for her; that the hiring of respondent Baniqued amounted to a "substantial non-compliance of her obligation" as an agricultural tenant and a ground for dispossession under Section 36, paragraph 2, [7] of Republic Act No. 3844, as amended; that although the receipt of the lease rentals by petitioner Federico Rosario is indicative of respondent Cayabyab's status as an agricultural lessee on the one-half hectare riceland portion, he should be evicted on the ground of deliberate refusal to pay rental; that respondent Baniqued is merely a hired farm laborer and, thus, he "has no better right than (respondent) spouses Miguel Resultay and Mercedes Resultay who hired him;" and that the non-riceland portion where respondent spouses Resultay reside does not appear to have been subleased or given to any third party for farm work and, hence, they should remain in possession of the same. [8] Respondents appealed to the DARAB. On June 10, 1994, the DARAB promulgated its decision, the decretal portion of which states: WHEREFORE, the assailed judgment dated June 14, 1991 is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Miguel and Mercedes Resultay are declared to be agricultural tenants on the land they till. Likewise, Basilio Cayabyab is maintained in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land he tills as an agricultural lessee. The responsible officials of the Department of Agrarian Reform in the Province of Pangasinan, specifically in the Municipality of Basista, Pangasinan are hereby ordered to fix the lease rental on the land being cultivated by Miguel and Mercedes Resultay in accordance with pertinent agrarian laws, rules and regulations. IT IS SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 128534 - VHJ CONSTRUCTION and DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, represented by its President, VICENTE D. HERCE, JR., vs. COURT OF APPEALS, DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD, GELACIO BATARIO, and MARTIN BATARIO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 128534 -
CaseG.R. No. 120363 -
G.R. No. 120363 -
CaseG.R. No. 136831 - CAROLINA LIQUETE GANZON,VS. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, FLORISCO BANHAW, HONORATO BANHAW, ROLANDO BANHAW, IGMEDIO PAMA, ANGELINO ABELITA, RENATO ABELITA AND AMABLE ABELITA.
G.R. No. 136831 -