Scribd
Upload
68 views

Isidro Vs CA

This case involves a dispute over land occupied by Petitioner Remigio Isidro. The land was owned by private respondent Natividad Gutierrez, and Isidro was allowed by Gutierrez's sister to occupy a swampy portion and convert it into a fishpond. Years later, when asked to vacate the land by the sister, Isidro refused. A complaint was filed in Municipal Trial Court for unlawful detainer. The court found the land was a fishpond and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, but the RTC and CA reversed, finding no tenurial agreement between the parties so the dispute was not agrarian in nature and not under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agr

Uploaded by

jne
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
68 views

Isidro Vs CA

This case involves a dispute over land occupied by Petitioner Remigio Isidro. The land was owned by private respondent Natividad Gutierrez, and Isidro was allowed by Gutierrez's sister to occupy a swampy portion and convert it into a fishpond. Years later, when asked to vacate the land by the sister, Isidro refused. A complaint was filed in Municipal Trial Court for unlawful detainer. The court found the land was a fishpond and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, but the RTC and CA reversed, finding no tenurial agreement between the parties so the dispute was not agrarian in nature and not under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agr

Uploaded by

jne
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Isidro vs CA

FACTS:
Private respondent Natividad Gutierrez is a owner of a parcel of land. Aniceta Garcia, sister of
Natividad and also his overseer, allowed Petitioner Remigio Isidro to occupy swampy portion of the
abovementioned land. The occupancy of a portion of said land was subject to the condition that
Isidro would vacate the land upon demand. Isidro occupied the land without paying any rental and
converted the same into a fishpond.

Years after, Aniceta demanded from Isidro the return of the land but refused to vacate and return
the land.

A complaint of unlawful detainer was then filed b4 the MTC. Isidro set up the defense that the
subject land is a fishpond and therefore is agricultural.

The court found out that the subject land is indeed a fishpond, hence dismissed the complaint ruling
that the land is agricultural and therefore the dispute over it is agrarian which is under the original
and exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of agrarian relations which is the DARAB. as provided in Sec.
12(a) of Republic Act No. 946 (now

RTC concurred however, CA reversed such decision as parties do not have tenurial agreement
hence it is not under the jurisdiction of DARAB.

ISSUES
Whether or not the subject property being an agricultural land makes it under the jurisdiction of
DARAB

HELD: No.
Revised Rules of Procedure provides that the Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board shall have
primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate all agrarian disputes involving the
implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program and other agrarian law.

An agrarian dispute refers to any controversy relating to tenurial arrangements, whether leasehold,
tenancy, stewardship or otherwise, over lands devoted to agriculture, including disputes
concerning farmworkers associations or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing,
maintaining, changing or seeking to arrange terms and conditions of such tenurial arrangements.

It is well-settled that the fishpond is an agricultural land. However, case involving an agricultural
land does not automatically make such case an agrarian dispute upon which the DARAB has
jurisdiction. The mere fact that the land is agricultural does not ipso facto make the possessor an
agricultural lessee of tenant. The law provides for conditions or requisites before he can qualify as
one and the land being agricultural is only one of
them.

The law states that an agrarian dispute must be a controversy relating to a tenurial arrangement
over lands devoted to agriculture. And as previously mentioned, such arrangement may be
leasehold, tenancy or stewardship.

Tenancy is not a purely factual relationship dependent on what the alleged tenant does upon the
land. It is also a legal relationship. The intent of the parties, the understanding when the farmer is
installed, and their written agreements, provided these are complied with and are not contrary to
law, are even more important. 19
The essential requisites of a tenancy relationship are: (1) the parties are the landowner and the
tenant; (2) the subject matter is agricultural land; (3) there is consent; (4) the purpose is
agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation by the tenant; and (6) there is a sharing of
harvests between the parties. All these requisites must concur in order to create a tenancy
relationship between the parties.

it is clear that there is no tenancy or agricultural/leasehold relationship existing between the


petitioner and the private respondent.

And in the absence of a tenancy relationship, the complaint for unlawful detainer is properly within
the jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court,

You might also like