G.R. No. 148157 - Spouses Carmona vs. Court of Appeals

Case Digest (G.R. No. 148157)
Advanced

Facts:

Parties and property background

Victoriano Caliwag was a tenant-tiller of a 3.1693-hectare riceland in Barrio Partida, San Miguel, Bulacan, and a part of the hacienda owned by Cecilio de Leon.
The heirs of Victoriano Caliwag included Consolacion, Regina, and Priscilla (all surnamed Caliwag), Rosa Caliwag Chico, Lubina Caliwag Carmona, and Almario Buenaventura.
The opposing claimants were spouses Renato Carmona and Lubina Carmona, who were issued Emancipation Patent (EP) No. A-278850.

Issuance and cancellation of tenancy documents

On October 15, 1973, the Minister of Agrarian Reform issued Victoriano a Certificate of Land Transfer (CLT) on the ground that he was the actual occupant, cultivator, and possessor of the land.
Victoriano died intestate on April 20, 1980 at seventy-nine (79) years of age.
On August 9, 1988, EP No. A-278850 was issued under the names Renato and Lubina Carmona, but was later discovered to have cancelled Victoriano’s CLT.
The EP was based on a deed titled “Pinagsanib na Pagpapawalang-bisa ng Karapatan”, purportedly executed on December 23, 1981 before Notary Public Alberto B. Mala, Sr., allegedly by Marciana Sanchez (Victoriano’s wife) and their children.

Contents and effects of the “Pinagsanib na Pagpapawalang-bisa ng Karapatan”

The deed stated that Victoriano’s heirs waived all rights over the landholding in favor of Renato Carmona and his wife Lubina S. Caliwag (Victoriano and Marciana’s youngest child), allegedly because the couple had been cultivating and possessing the landholding.
The spouses Carmona allegedly paid rentals to the landowner and to the Land Bank of the Philippines.
The spouses Carmona thereafter secured the emancipation patent in their names, claiming the benefit of the purported waiver.

Initiation of proceedings by Victoriano’s heirs

On March 30, 1995, Consolacion and Priscilla Caliwag, Rosa Chico, and Almario Buenaventura filed a petition with the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (PARAB) of Malolos, Bulacan under PARAB Case No. 925-Bul ’95.
The petition sought: (a) cancellation of EP No. A-278850; and (b) issuance of the proper emancipation patent in the heirs’ names.
The heirs assailed the genuineness and due execution of the “Pinagsanib na Pagpapawalang-bisa ng Karapatan.”
In their Joint Affidavit dated October 4, 1995, the heirs stated material points in Filipino:

They were the children and heirs of Victoriano Caliwag who died on April 20, 1980.
They inherited a 3.1693-hectare land in Barrio Partida, San Miguel, Bulacan.
They cultivated the land jointly with their other siblings.
Without their knowledge and without their consent, Renato Carmona allegedly took steps to have the land taken and transferred to his and his wife’s names.
They stated that they never agreed to waive or relinquish their rights to the land to Renato and Lubina.
They claimed they did not give Lubina and Renato the right to transfer the land to their names.
Rosa and Consolacion allegedly did not know how to sign, write, or read.
Regina and Priscilla allegedly could sign but were allegedly not proficient in writing and reading due to age and weak eyesight.
They asserted that if any document used for the issuance of Emancipation Patent No. A-2738850 (sic) bore their signatures/thumbmarks, it must be void because they never consented.
They asserted continued cultivation and work on the land.

In the same petition and their submissions, they anchored their claim on the alleged lack of consent and alleged forgery of signatures/thumbmarks.

Defense theory of the spouses Carmona

In their answer, the spouses Carmona alleged that petitioners had already waived or abandoned tenurial rights over the property as heirs of Victoriano under the “Pinagsanib na Pagpapawalang-bisa ng Karapatan” executed on December 23, 1981.
Respondents appended a copy of the deed with their answer.
In their Position Paper, spouses Carmona alleged an antecedent factual narrative:

In February 1977, Victoriano decided to waive tenurial rights in their favor because he was allegedly too old to cultivate.
Victoriano allegedly had unpaid rentals totaling 178 cavans of palay, and also had loans with the landowner, Atty. Cecilio P. De Leon.
Thereafter, a Leasehold Contract was allegedly executed between them and the landowner.
They allegedly took possession and paid rentals, including Victoriano’s arrears to Atty. De Leon.
They insisted they were in actual possession for 18 years.
They claimed that after DAR issuance, an emancipation patent was issued in their favor.

During the PARAB hearing, Renato Carmona allegedly failed to adduce the original copy of the deed despite repeated requests.
The PARAB later declared inadmissible the copy of the deed proffered by respondents.

PARAB and DARAB rulings on validity of EP

Despite the inadmissibility ruling, the PARAB ultimately dismissed the heirs’ petition in the original judgment and (as later described) treated the EP as valid, at least initially.
On February 27, 1996, the PARAB rendered judgment dismissing the petition and affirming the validity of EP No. A-278850.

The PARAB affirmed the validity and legality of the EP issued in favor of Renato Carmona.
It ordered maintenance of private respondents in peaceful possession, cultivation, and enjoyment.
It dismissed the case for lack of merit and made no costs pronouncement.

On motion of Victoriano’s heirs, the PARAB issued a Resolution on June 25, 1995 reversing itself.

The PARAB reasoned that doubt existed on the document’s execution because petitioners denied signing it and claimed forgery.
It noted that respondents did not deny the claim of forged signatures/thumbmarks.
It stressed that respondents were repeatedly asked in open court to produce the original but failed.
It inferred deceit or fraud in execution, used to cancel the CLT and lead to the issuance of EP in Renato Carmona’s name.

The PARAB declared EP No. A-278850 void and ordered issuance of another patent in the heirs’ names.
On appeal, the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) rendered judgment on July 27, 1998 affirming the appealed resolution.

The DARAB declared that Victoriano Caliwag was a bona fide holder of a CLT as the actual occupant, cultivator, and possessor.
It ruled that upon issuance of P.D. No. 27 on October 21, 1972, ownership passed to Victoriano.
It cited Locsin v. Valenzuela (G.R. No. 51333, February 19, 1991) for the proposition that ownership of lands under OLT moved from registered owners to tenants.
It applied the rule that title acquired under P.D. No. 27 shall not be transferable except by hereditary succession or in favor of the government.
It rejected the spouses Carmona’s waiver theory based on the Pinagsanib.

CA proceedings and disposition

Spouses Carmona filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals.
On July 31, 2000, the CA dismissed the petition and affirmed the DARAB decision with modification.
The CA held:

Though spouses Carmona paid remaining amortization balances to the former landlord, the land was placed in Victoriano’s name in the DAR master list.
Victoriano was considered rightful owner by virtue of his CLT issuance under P.D. No. 27 because he was the actual occupant, cultivator, and possessor.
Under P.D. No. 226, full compliance by the grantee with required undertakings resulted in grant of title and subsequent issuance of EP in favor of the farmer/grantee.
There was no transfer of rights over the CLT.
When petitioners paid the remaining balance, they paid only in representation of Victoriano, so the payments did not confer ow...(Subscriber-Only)

Unlock Full Case Digest

Supreme Court E-Library

Case Digest (G.R. No. 148157)
Concise Detailed

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 148157)
Advanced

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 148157) Concise Detailed

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 148157) Advanced

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 148157)
Concise Detailed

Case Digest (G.R. No. 148157)
Advanced