Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1984 > September 1984 Decisions > G.R. No. L-65102 September 28, 1984 - MAXIMO AQUINO v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-65102. September 28, 1984.]

MAXIMO AQUINO, Petitioner, v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, PEDRO PERALTA and LOLITA PERALTA, Respondents.

Ambrosio Padilla for Petitioner.

Jose Sotto Beltran for Private Respondents.

Crispulo B. Ducusin collaborating counsel for Private Respondents.


SYLLABUS


LABOR AND SOCIAL LEGISLATION; URBAN LAND REFORM LAW: NOT APPLICABLE TO SUBJECT PROPERTY IN CASE AT BAR. — We hold that the instant case is not covered by the Urban Land Reform Law because 19th Avenue, Quezon City is not an urban land reform zone, or is not among the sixty-six blighted areas for priority development (APD) enumerated in Proclamation No. 1967 dated May 14, 1980, 78 OG 6809. In No. 36, what is mentioned as a blighted area is "5th to 7th Avenue, an area composed of two blocks bounded on the north by Liberty Avenue, 5th Avenue on the west, Santolan Road on the south and on the cast by 7th Avenue." Moreover, the facts of this case indubitably show that the Peraltas are not the legitimate tenants envisaged in Section 6 of the law who can justifiably invoke the Urban Land Reform Law.


D E C I S I O N


AQUINO, J.:


The question in this case is whether the Urban Land Reform Law bars the ejectment of the Peralta spouses from a 50-square meter portion of a lot located at 31 19th Avenue, Cubao, Quezon City, considering that the owner, Maximo Aquino, would construct on the lot a five-door apartment to be used by his five married children who reside in rented houses.

That small portion was leased to Maximo Siobal in writing at ten pesos a month (p. 134, Rollo). However, the parties and the lower courts assumed that the lease was for fifteen years and that the real lessee was Exequiel Peralta, Siobal’s uncle, who allegedly built thereon a house. Exequiel sold the house in 1967 to another nephew, Pedro Peralta, who supposedly had been staying with him since 1962.

Aquino refused to extend the lease when it expired in 1975. But upon the pleading of Peralta’s wife, the lease was extended to February 18, 1976. Other occupants of the lot had voluntarily vacated it.

After the expiration of the additional one-year period, Aquino made demands upon the Peraltas to vacate the lot. Since they refused to restore possession of the lot, he sued them for ejectment in the city court on January 2, 1980. The city court, and later, the Regional Trial Court, ordered the Peraltas to vacate the lot. They found the ejectment to be justified under section 5 (c), Batas Pambansa Blg. 25.

The Peraltas appealed to the Intermediate Appellate Court which held that the ejectment was not sanctioned by the Urban Land Reform Law which provides:chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

"SECTION 6. Land Tenancy in Urban Land Reform Areas. — Within the Urban Zones, legitimate tenants who have resided on the land for ten years or more, who have built their homes on the land, and residents who legally occupied the land by contract, continuously for the last ten years shall not be dispossessed of the land and shall be allowed the right of first refusal to purchase the same within a reasonable time and at reasonable prices, under terms and conditions to be determined by the Urban Zone Expropriation and Land Management Committee created by Section 8 of this Decree."cralaw virtua1aw library

We hold that the instant case is not covered by the Urban Land Reform Law because 19th Avenue, Quezon City is not an urban land reform zone, or is not among the sixty-six blighted areas for priority development (APD) enumerated in Proclamation No. 1967 dated May 14, 1980, 78 OG 6809.

In No. 36, what is mentioned as a blighted area is "5th to 7th Avenue, an area composed of two blocks bounded on the north by Liberty Avenue, 5th Avenue on the west, Santolan Road on the south and on the east by 7th Avenue."

Moreover, the facts of this case indubitably show that the Peraltas are not the legitimate tenants envisaged in section 6 of the law who can justifiably invoke the Urban Land Reform Law.

WHEREFORE, the judgment of the Appellate Court is reversed and set aside. The decisions of the city court and the Regional Trial Court are affirmed. Costs against the private respondents.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar, Abad Santos, Escolin and Cuevas, JJ., concur.

Concepcion and Guerrero, JJ., are on leave.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman





September-1984 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-37061 September 5, 1984 - MAMBULAO LUMBER COMPANY v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-57298 September 7, 1984 - MYC-AGRO-INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION v. PURIFICACION CAMERINO VDA. DE CALDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-32295 September 12, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO LORENZO

  • G.R. No. L-38787 September 12, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIANO BACAY

  • G.R. No. L-43923 September 12, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARTIN MAGUDDAYAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-47440-42 September 12, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONARDO LOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-64050 September 12, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ORIENTAL MINDORO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66859 September 12, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERMAN G. LEE, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-31282 September 17, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EMILIANO PLANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29613 September 18, 1984 - APOLINAR S. FOJAS v. SATURNINA R. DE GREY

  • G.R. Nos. L-32866-7 September 21, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO F. SABILANO

  • G.R. No. L-42408 September 21, 1984 - ISIDRA P. CADIRAO, ET AL. v. NUMERIANO G. ESTENZO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-56769 September 21, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARMOGENES S. SANCHEZ

  • G.R. No. L-26298 September 28, 1984 - CMS ESTATE, INC. v. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28691 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BALA MARUHOM

  • G.R. No. L-30666 September 28, 1984 - ANDRES ABAN, ET AL. v. MANUEL L. ENAGE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-31712 September 28, 1984 - IN RE: ERNESTO V. ROSALES v. ASUNCION Z. CASTILLO ROSALES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-32103 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE BUENSUCESO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-32162 September 28, 1984 - PASAY CITY GOVERNMENT, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF MANILA, BRANCH X, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-33225 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NICOMEDES RAMO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-33504 September 28, 1984 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. LEE BON UI

  • G.R. No. L-33642 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RIZALDO LOPEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-35574 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VALENTINA L. MANANQUIL

  • G.R. No. L-35744 September 28, 1984 - WENCESLAO JUNIO v. FELICIANO DE LOS SANTOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-36957 September 28, 1984 - ANICETO IBABAO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-36987-88 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO T. CATACUTAN

  • G.R. No. L-38175 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO LACHICA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-40207 September 28, 1984 - ROSA K. KALAW v. BENJAMIN RELOVA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-40308 September 28, 1984 - ISMAEL GULA v. PEDRO DIANALA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-41603 September 28, 1984 - PRIMITIVA VDA. DE GALINDO v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-42592 September 28, 1984 - FLORENCIA ANG LOPEZ v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-43276 September 28, 1984 - BENEDICTA C. DAZA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-45407-08 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EMILIO URBISTONDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-55138 September 28, 1984 - ERNESTO V. RONQUILLO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-57936 September 28, 1984 - DMRC ENTERPRISES v. ESTE DEL SOL MOUNTAIN RESERVE, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-61752 September 28, 1984 - SY KAO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-62130 September 28, 1984 - SEAVAN CARRIER, INC., ET AL. v. GTI SPORTSWEAR CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-62992 September 28, 1984 - ARLENE BABST, ET AL. v. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE BOARD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-63129 September 28, 1984 - WAYNE JAIN v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-64573 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FREDDIE RENOJO

  • G.R. No. L-65102 September 28, 1984 - MAXIMO AQUINO v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-65585 September 28, 1984 - SAINT LOUIS FACULTY CLUB v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66069 September 28, 1984 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66136 September 28, 1984 - ELPIDIO EMPELIS, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66526 September 28, 1984 - RAFAEL B. GAERLAN, SR. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-67966 September 28, 1984 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO NAVOA, ET AL.

  • UDK-6066 September 30, 1984 - ROGELIO CORDERO v. BETHEL K. MOSCARDON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-42918 September 30, 1984 - NESTOR M. PATRIARCA v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-51574-77 September 30, 1984 - VICTOR CLAPANO, ET AL. v. FILOMENO GAPULTOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-53914 September 30, 1984 - RODOLFO DE LEON v. CONRADO LINDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66274 September 30, 1984 - BAGUMBAYAN CORPORATION v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.