CONCEPCION TORALBA, petitioner vs. FRANCISCO MERCADO, respondent G.R. No. 146480.
July 14, 2004 Facts: When Presidential Decree No. 27 took effect on October 21, 1972, the Lydia Depusoy state located at !rdaneta, Pan"asinan, #as placed under the Operation Land $ransfer %OL$& Pro"ra' of the Depart'ent of ("rarian )efor' %D()&. Petitioner *oncepcion $oralba #as a'on" the +ualified far'er,beneficiaries. -he #as issued a *ertificate of Land $ransfer %*L$& co.erin" 1.2/ hectares of the Lydia Depusoy state. 0o#e.er, based on a #ai.er and a resolution fro' the Samahang Nayon, )e"ional Director (ntonio 1. Nuesa of D(), -an 2ernando, La !nion %)e"ion 3& issued an Or !r cancelin" the *L$ of the petitioner and re,allocatin" the lot to respondent 2rancisco 1ercado. Petitioner instituted an action for reco.ery of possession and da'a"es a"ainst the respondent before the D()(4. 3n her Co"#l$%&', she alle"ed that she #as a tenant of lon" standin" of the disputed land and in 1995, respondent took possession of one,half of the northern portion by plantin" palay. Petitioner clai's that a"ain, in No.e'ber of the sa'e year, the respondent planted palay, this ti'e on the #hole area. Petitioner prayed she be declared the tenant,lessee and6or a'orti7in",tenant of the land. -he asked that the respondent be directed to stop disturbin" her possession of the land and to pay da'a"es. 3n A&()!r, respondent 2rancisco 1ercado clai'ed he had been tillin" the land in open, continuous and actual possession since 19//. 0e asserted that petitioner8s ri"ht o.er the said property #as cancelled #ith finality and thereafter re,allocated to hi'. 3n support of his clai', he attached a copy of the D() Order and petitioner8s #ai.er of ri"hts. Issue: Whether the transfer of petitioner8s ri"hts to the land to respondent 1ercado is in .iolation of P.D. No. 27. Ruling: $itle to land ac+uired pursuant to this Decree or the Land )efor' Pro"ra' of the 9o.ern'ent shall not be transferable e:cept by hereditary succession or to the 9o.ern'ent in accordance #ith the pro.isions of this Decree, the *ode of ("rarian )efor' and other e:istin" la#s and re"ulations. 0o#e.er, there are reports that 'any far'er,beneficiaries of P.D. 27 ha.e transferred the o#nership, ri"hts and6or possession of their far's6ho'elots to other persons or ha.e surrendered the sa'e to their for'er lando#ners. (ll these transactions6 surrenders are .iolati.e of P.D. 27 and therefore null and .oid. Pursuant to P.D. No. 27, a far'er,beneficiary cannot 'ake any .alid for' of transfer of the land ad;udicated to the', e:cept to the "o.ern'ent or by hereditary succession to their respecti.e successors. $he far'er,beneficiary alone has title o.er the a"ricultural land co.ered by the *ertificate of Land $ransfer "ranted to hi'. $he purpose of the a"rarian refor' la# is to ensure the far'er,beneficiary8s continued possession, culti.ation and en;oy'ent of the land he tills. $o do other#ise is to re.ert back to the old feudal syste' #hereby the lando#ners reac+uired .ast tracts of land and thus circu'.ent the "o.ern'ent8s pro"ra' of freein" the tenant,far'ers fro' the bonda"e of the soil. Nonetheless, a second look at the present transaction re.eals that petitioner .oluntarily surrendered her landholdin" to the -a'ahan" Nayon, a le"ally per'issible con.eyance, for bein" in fa.or of the "o.ern'ent. D() 1e'orandu' *irculars set out the procedure by #hich any tenant,far'er #ho abandons, #ai.es or refuses to beco'e a beneficiary under P.D. No. 27 'ay .alidly forfeit his *L$. 3t re+uires %1& a reco''endation fro' a duly authori7ed -a'ahan" Nayon %or a"rarian refor' tea' leader& of other +ualified tenant,far'ers #ho shall be substituted to all ri"hts and obli"ations of the abandonin" or surrenderin" tenant,far'er< %2& an in.esti"ation or hearin" conducted on the lands co.ered prior to its disposal and6or re,allocation< and %=& an order or decision declarin" the dis+ualification and re'o.al of the tenant concerned.
2irstly, the -a'ahan" Nayon, throu"h its )esolution No. />, declared that *oncepcion $oralba relin+uished her ri"ht to the land allocated to her. $hen it reco''ended three +ualified tenant, far'ers for substitution and fro' a'on" the', respondent #as found the 'ost +ualified to till the land. -econdly, the ("rarian )efor' $ea' %()$&, in its 3n.esti"ation )eport found that petitioner no lon"er tilled the area allocated to her. 3nstead, it #as the respondent #ho #as the actual tiller of the far'. 2inally, an Order #as issued by the D() -an 2ernando, La !nion %)e"ion 3&, "rantin" the re,allocation of the petitioner8s *L$ in fa.or of the herein respondent. No error #as co''itted by the *ourt of (ppeals in affir'in" the D()(48s decision. W0 ) 2O) , the petition is hereby D N3 D for lack of 'erit
