G.R. No. 191376 , January 08, 2020
RICARIDO GOLEZ, IN HIS OWN BEHALF AND HIS CHILDREN CRISPINO GOLEZ, ISIDRO GOLEZ, EMMA G. DE LOS SANTOS, HELEN G. CABECO, VICTORIA G. NORBE, ANTERO GOLEZ, SIMON GOLEZ AND GRACE G. BACLAY, IN SUBSTITUTION OF THE DECEASED PRESENTACION GOLEZ, PETITIONERS, VS. MARIANO ABAIS, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

The case involves a dispute over possession of two parcels of land (Lots 28 and 29) in Barangay Jalaud Norte, Zarraga, Iloilo, originally awarded under Operation Land Transfer (OLT) to Ireneo Deocampo. Upon Ireneo’s death, his daughter, Presentacion Golez, filed a complaint for ejectment and recovery of possession against her brother-in-law, Mariano Abais (husband of Presentacion’s late sister, Vicenta). Presentacion claimed she was identified by the DAR Regional Director as the qualified farmer-beneficiary successor to her father. Mariano resisted, asserting he was the actual tenant and cultivator of the land for over thirty years, having fully paid the amortizations, and that Presentacion’s claim was barred by prior judgments. The Provincial Adjudicator ruled in favor of Presentacion, ordering Mariano to vacate, a decision affirmed by the DARAB. The Court of Appeals reversed, upholding Mariano’s possession based on tenancy rights recognized in prior court and DARAB decisions and remanded the case to the DAR Regional Director for determination of compensation due to Ireneo’s other heirs.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the DARAB decision and upholding respondent Mariano Abais’s right to possess the disputed land as a tenant, thereby setting aside the DAR Regional Director’s orders identifying Presentacion Golez as the qualified successor-beneficiary.

RULING

The Supreme Court REVERSED the Court of Appeals’ Decision and Resolution. The Court held that the subject lands, having been placed under OLT pursuant to P.D. No. 27, are governed by agrarian reform laws and regulations concerning succession. The rules of hereditary succession under the Civil Code do not apply; instead, succession is governed specifically by Ministry Memorandum Circular No. 19, series of 1978 (MC 19). Under MC 19, in case of the death of a tenant-beneficiary with several heirs, the heirs must choose one among themselves to be the sole owner-cultivator, with priority given first to the surviving spouse, and in the spouse’s absence or incapacity, according to age among the heirs. The DAR Regional Director is authorized to confirm this selection or designate the sole owner-cultivator. Here, the DAR Regional Director’s Orders dated May 31, 1999 and December 11, 2000, which identified Presentacion (the eldest child) as the qualified beneficiary and granted her petition for reallocation, were final and executory. Mariano, not being an heir of the original beneficiary Ireneo, could not claim a right of succession. His claim of tenancy was incompatible with Ireneo’s status as a CLT holder, who was prohibited from employing tenants. The prior judgments cited by Mariano did not constitute res judicata as they did not involve the same cause of action concerning the identification and qualification of a successor-beneficiary under the agrarian reform program. Thus, the DARAB decision declaring Presentacion as the lawful possessor and cultivator was reinstated. The case was remanded to the DAR Regional Director to determine the proper compensation due to Ireneo’s other heirs, consistent with MC 19.