Francisco Salazar, petitioner vs. Reynaldo De Leon, respondent G.R. No.

127965 January 20, 2009 FACTS: Respondent filed a complaint for the recovery of real property and damages against petitioner. Respondent alleged he is the registered owner of a parcel of land which was tilled by herein petitioner by respondents mere tolerance and petitioner refused to surrender possession of the land despite demand. The case was brought to the RTC which ruled in favor of the herein respondent and against the herein petitioner by applying Article 428, NCC. Petitioner filed a Motion for New Trial and Lift Order of Default but was denied for lack of merit. He filed an appeal with the CA essentially invoking the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship between respondent and him while at the same time initiated before the DARAB (DARAdjudication Board) a Case #-1380-ISA94. The DARAB with its finding that petitioner was a bona-fide tenant of respondent who should be maintained in the peaceful possession and cultivation of the subject property which petitioner submitted to the CA but CA in turn rejected petitioners arguments. Hence, a petition for Certiorari. ISSUE: Whether or not there is an agrarian dispute between petitioner and respondent. HELD: The instant case undeniably involves a controversy involving an adverse relationship between a landlord and his tenant. The reason for petitioners refusal to surrender possession of the subject property to the respondent is that petitioner is allegedly his tenant, and has a right that is protected under the agrarian reform laws, a claim which respondent denies. There is, thus, a dispute as to the nature of the relationship between respondent and petitioner. The Court concluded that there is substantial evidence to establish the existence of a tenancy relationship between petitioner and respondent. The receipts presented by petitioner covering rental payments to respondent for the subject property constitute concrete evidence of tenurial relations between them. Hence, petition is granted.

Allied Banking Corporation, petitioner vs. LBP and the Sec. of the DENR, respondent G.R. No. 175422, March 13, 2009 FACTS Petitioner owned two abutting parcels of land that were compulsory acquired by the DAR pursuant to RA 6675, as amended. Respondent (LBP) subjected the land for valuation and said valuation was upheld by the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator. However, petitioner filed a petition for just compensation with the RTC claiming that said valuation made by the LBP is in question and insisted the Market Data Approach for the valuation of the two parcels of land in which case based on sales and listings of comparable property registered within the vicinity. Said valuation was adopted by the RTC in its decision. Respondent appealed the RTC decision and CA nullified the RTC decision and remanded the case to the RTC for determining just compensation in strict compliance with the provisions of RA 6657, as amended, the DAR AO and the Rules of Court. Petitioner filed a MR but denied by CA. hence the instant case. ISSUE: Whether the RTC acting as a special agrarian court will adopt the Market Data Approach in the valuation of the two parcels of land. HELD: The court refused to accept the MDA as method of valuation. The court instead adopted Section 17 of RA 6657, as amended and DAO No. 6. Hence petition is denied and the case was remanded to the RTC.