Title
Heirs of Feliciano, Jr. vs. Land Bank of the Philippines
Case
G.R. No. 215290
Decision Date
Jan 11, 2017
Heirs of Feliciano disputed DAR's land valuation under PD 27; SC ruled just compensation must reflect 1989 values, remanded for proper computation with interest adjustments.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 215290)

Jurisdictional Background

This case pertains to a parcel of agricultural land in F. Simeon, Ragay, Camarines Sur, classified as unirrigated riceland, with a specific focus on a 135.2583-hectare portion of it. The land was under the coverage of PD 27, which facilitated the redistribution of land from landlords to tenant farmers. The claim for just compensation has gone through several administrative and judicial proceedings, leading to this petition for review.

Facts of the Case

The LBP initially valued the land at P1,301,498.09. After this valuation was rejected, the LBP made a deposit of this amount, which was later released to the petitioners in 2000. Following the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator's decision in 2001, the value was set at P4,641,080.465. The LBP subsequently filed a petition for the determination of just compensation, which was initially dismissed then reinstated. Prior to the trial court's consideration, the Feliciano heirs assigned their rights to Espiritu.

RTC Proceedings

In its Order, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) required the LBP to revalue the land, resulting in a new valuation of P7,725,904.05. While Espiritu accepted this valuation, she sought a 12% annual interest due to delays in payment. The RTC ruled that while the just compensation was correctly fixed at P7,725,904.05, it imposed a 12% annual interest from January 1, 2010, until full payment. The RTC later modified the terms regarding interest payment and subsequently dismissed both parties' motions for reconsideration.

CA Ruling

The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC's valuation of P7,725,904.05 but adjusted the interest computation, ruling that interest of 12% should accrue from July 1, 2009, up until the LBP’s payment to Espiritu, culminating in a distinct amount owed to her due to the delayed execution of payment. The appeal to the CA regarding their computed total was denied again, ultimately leading to this petition before the Supreme Court.

Legal Issues at Hand

The fundamental question involves the correctness of the CA's determination of just compensation. The Supreme Court specified the legal framework guiding the valuation of expropriated lands, indicating that compensation must align with Republic Act No. 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law), which takes precedence from the time of taking—specifically, the issuance of emancipation patents in 1989.

Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court noted that the claim folder's receipt date by the LBP (December 2, 1997) was prior to the cut-off of July 1, 2009, thus necessitating that the just compensation be determined based on Section 17 of RA 6657, rather than the post-2009 amendments. The RTC and CA's failure to adhere to the pertinent DAR regulations meant that just compensation must be recalibrated.

Remand for Just Compensation Determination

The Supreme Court reversed the CA

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.