Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2007 > April 2007 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 156304 : April 18, 2007] ANACLETO R. MENESES, ET AL. V. SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN REFORM, ET AL.:

Quoted hereunder, for your information is a resolution of the Third Division of this Court dated 18 April 2007:

G.R. No. 156304 - Anacleto R. Meneses, et al. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, et al.


For resolution are the separate motions for reconsideration filed by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) of the Court's Decision dated October 26, 2006, granting the petition and remanding the case to the Regional Trial Court of Bulacan, Branch 13. for the final determination of just compensation in accordance with Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657 and based on the value of the land at the time of the payment of just compensation, and not on the effectivity date of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 27, which is October 21, 1972.

The DAR does not take exception to the applicability of R.A. No. 6657, but contends that the value of the land should be reckoned from October 2 1, 1972, and not at the time of the payment of just compensation.

On the other hand, the LBP objects to the Court's decision in setting aside the Court of Appeals (CA) Decision dated May 30, 2002, which is already final and executory, and in applying the R.A. No. 6657 instead of P.O. No. 27.

 In granting the petition, the Court set aside the CA Decision dated May 30, 2002 dismissing petitioners' appeal on the premise that the negligence o( petitioners1 counsel should not prejudice the case, and the interests of substantial justice merit a reversal of the CA Decision. As stated in the ponencia -

If the Court sustains the CA Decision, which affirmed the RTC Decision, petitioners will be left holding an empty bag, so to speak. It should be noted that the property subject of this case has already been distributed to the farmer-beneficiaries way back in 1972, and up to now. petitioner will be left without any recourse as regards the resolution of the issues of just compensation since both the RTC and the DARAB already dismissed the separate complaints for just compensation filed before them.
xxx

 
The Court also applied the ruling in Land Bank of the Philippines v. Nativhiad (G.R. No. 1271 98, May 16, 2005), which applied the provisions of R.A. No. 6657 in computing just compensation for property expropriated under P.D. No. 27. In so doing, it is the Court's view that: "More than 30 years have passed and petitioners are yet to benefit from it, while the farmer-beneficiaries have already been harvesting its produce for the longest time. Events have rendered the applicability of P. D. No. 27 inequitable: x x x'"

The basic issues have been passed upon and petitioners failed to present substantial argument to warrant a reconsideration of the Court's Decision dated October 23, 2006.

WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED with finality.

SO ORDERED.