Case Digest (G.R. No. 192890)
Facts:
Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) petitioned for review on certiorari assailing the Court of Appeals decisions dated August 28, 2007 and June 29, 2010, both in CA-G.R. CEB SP No. 01846, which affirmed with modification the March 27, 2006 Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iloilo City, Branch 34. The RTC, acting as a special agrarian court, ordered LBP to pay the respondents, namely Virginia Palmares and others, the total amount of P669,962.53 as just compensation for their agricultural land, plus twelve percent (12%) interest per annum from June 1995 until full payment. The respondents inherited a 19.98-hectare agricultural land located in Barangay Tagubang, Passi City, Iloilo, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-11311. In 1995, the respondents voluntarily offered the land for sale to the government under Republic Act No. 6657 (RA 6657). The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) acquired 19.1071 hectares and LBP valued the land at P440,355.92, but the ...Case Digest (G.R. No. 192890)
Facts:
Respondents Virginia Palmares and co-owners inherited a 19.98-hectare agricultural land in Barangay Tagubang, Passi City, Iloilo, covered by TCT No. T-11311. In 1995, they voluntarily offered the land for sale to the government under Republic Act No. 6657 (RA 6657), and the Department of Agrarian Reform acquired 19.1071 hectares, which the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) valued at P440,355.92 for provisional deposit after respondents rejected the amount.On August 17, 2001, respondents filed a petition for judicial determination of just compensation before the RTC of Iloilo City, Branch 34. The RTC fixed just compensation at P669,962.53 plus 12% interest per annum from June 1995 until full payment and granted an additional 5% cash incentive under Section 19 of RA 6657. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed with modification, limiting the 12% interest to the remaining balance after LBP’s deposit; LBP then sought review before the Supreme Court, raising errors in the valuation method and interest, and pointing to a related CA case involving the DAR.
Issues:
- Whether the CA erred in affirming the RTC’s just compensation despite alleged non-compliance with the valuation factors and DAR formula under Section 17 of RA 6657.
- Whether the CA erred in holding LBP liable for 12% interest.
- Whether the CA erred in not consolidating the case with CA-G.R. CEB SP No. 01845 and remanding in light of the later CA decision thereon.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)