HEIRS OF FRANCISCO R. TANTOCO, SR., MARIA R. TANTOCO, ZOSIMO TANTOCO, MARGARITA R. TANTOCO, AND PACITA R. TANTOCO, VS. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD (DARAB), AGRARIAN REFORM BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO, GEN. TRIAS, CAVITE, REGISTER OF DEED

Ruling

accordingly cancelled petitioners' TCT No. T-402203. Upon learning of the cancellation of their TCT on the above property, petitioners filed an action for Cancellation of TCT No. CLOA-1424, and the reinstatement of their TCT No. T-402203 before the Adjudication Board for Region IV of the Department of Agrarian Reform on November 11, 1994. [9] Docketed as DARAB Case No. IV-Ca-003-94, the petition alleged, inter alia , that the land in question was covered by an ongoing industrial estate development site per land use plan of the Municipality of General Trias, Cavite; that the land had been planted with sugar and declared as such for taxation purposes under Tax Declaration No. 12502-A; that in an Order dated September 1, 1986, of then Minister of Agrarian Reform Heherson Alvarez, the same land was declared outside the ambit of PD No. 27; and that the property is within the portion of Cavite that had been declared as an industrial zone in the CALABARZON area, hence, the value of real properties included therein had greatly appreciated. [10] Petitioners alleged that as a result of the implementation of the CARL in June of 1988, and coupled with the knowledge that the area had been declared part of the industrial zone of Cavite, persons unknown to petitioners began to claim to be tenants or farmholders on said land, when in truth and in fact, petitioners never had any tenant or farmworker at any time on their land, and neither did petitioners give their consent for anyone to farm the same "which is suitable for sugarcane, residential or industrial purposes and not for rice or corn or other industrial products. [11] Petitioners added that due to the annoying persistence of DAR officials and employees who kept on coming back to the residence of Francisco R. Tantoco, Sr., in Quezon City, the latter was constrained to offer to sell the subject land under the VOS scheme for P5 million originally per hectare; that, thereafter, petitioners did not receive any reply from DAR, hence, they paid the real property tax due on the land for 1994 on March 28, 1994; that, afterwards, their title to the land under TCT No. T-402203 dated April 19, 1994 was cancelled without prior notice and in lieu thereof, TCT No. CLOA-1424 dated August 30, 1993 was issued by the Register of Deeds in favor of ARBA whose 53 members are not tenants and are unknown to them and are likewise not qualified or are disqualified to be beneficiaries under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657. [12] Finally, petitioners claimed that some officials and employees of DAR Region IV, the MARO of General Trias, Cavite, the Land Bank of the Philippines, and the Register of Deeds of Cavite, with intent to gain, conspired with other private persons and several members of ARBA to deprive petitioners of said land or its fair market value or proceeds thereof, and committed the crime of falsification of public documents by making it appear that the offer to sell was at P500,000 per hectare instead of P5,000,000 per hec