DELA CRUZ v. QUIAZON

stipulated rental because he had already abandoned the
landholding.
5. For this reason, Amelia Quiazon prayed for his ejectment from the
property and the termination of their tenancy relationship
Procedural:
6. Provincial Adjudicators decision:
Provincial Adjudicator Romeo Bello dismissed the complaint based on
his finding that the landholding had not been abandoned by Feliciano
considering that petitioner Renato dele Cruz, a member of Felicianos
immediate family, was in actual and physical possession thereof.
7. Amelia and her siblings filed an Application for Retention before
DAR Regional Office Region 3.
DAR granted the application with an order to maintain in peaceful
possession the tenants of the subject landholding.
8. DARAB:
It dismissed Amelias appeal from the decision of the Provincial
Adjudicator.
9. DARABs resolution:
DARAB set aside its first decision primarily based on the DAR Order
granting granting the application for retention, as well as its finding that
Ferdinand and Feliciano dela Cruz abandoned the subject landholding
when they went to the U.S.A.
10. COURT OF APPEALS
TOPIC: Termination of Tenancy Relation:

Abandonment
DELA CRUZ v. QUIAZON
G.R. No. 171961. November 28. 2008.
PETITION for review on certiorari of the decision and resolution of the
Court of Appeals
FACTS:
1. Estela Dizon-Garcia, mother of respondent Amelia G. Quiazon,
was the registered owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No.
107576, situated in Capas, Tarlac.
The property was brought under the coverage of Operation Land
Transfer pursuant to Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 27.
2. On June 8, 1981, Feliciano dela Cruz, a tenant-farmer, was issued
CLT No. 0-0362073 over a 3.7200-hectare portion of the said
property.
3. On March 9, 1992, the heirs of Estela Dizon-Garcia executed a
Deed of Extrajudicial Admission and Partition with Waiver
adjudicating among themselves all the properties left by both of
their parents, except for the subject property, which was
adjudicated solely in favor of Amelia Quiazon.
4. On May 15, 1993, Amelia Quaizon filed a Complaint with the
Provincial Adjudication Board of the Department of Agrarian
Reform (DAR) against petitioner Ferdinand dela Cruz, alleging that
in 1991, he entered into a leasehold contract with her, by virtue of
which he bound himself to deliver 28 cavans of palay as rental.
Since 1991, Ferdinand dela Cruz allegedly failed to deliver the
(a) a clear and absolute intention to renounce a right or claim or to

desert a right or property; and
(b) (b) an external act by which that intention is expressed or carried
into effect.
The intention to abandon implies a departure, with the avowed intent of
never returning, resuming or claiming the right and the interest that
have been abandoned.
In the case, the immigration of the original farmer-beneficiary to the
U.S.A. did not necessarily result in the abandonment of the
landholding, considering that one of his sons, petitioner Renato dela
Cruz, continued cultivating the land.
Personal cultivation, as required by law, includes cultivation of the land
by the tenant (lessee) himself or with the aid of the immediate farm
household, which refers to the members of the family of the tenant and
other persons who are dependent upon him for support and who
usually help him in the [agricultural] activities
It denied petition and motion for reconsideration.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Ferdinand dela Cruz abandoned the landholding.
Case for Petitioner:

They argued they have continuously cultivated the property.
Renato dele Cruz, a member of Felicianos immediate family, was in
actual and physical possession and continued cultivating the land.
Case for Defendant:

Ferdinand and Feliciano dela Cruz were already immigrants to the
United States of America and that petitioner Renato dela Cruz, the
actual tiller of the land, was a usurper because his possession of the
land was without the consent of the landowner. Amelia Quiazon argued
that by migrating to the U.S.A., Feliciano was deemed to have
abandoned the landholding, for which reason his CLT should now be
canceled.
DISPOSITIVE:
Petition granted.
SC RULING WITH RATIO:
Ferdinand dela Cruz did not abandon the landholding.
Ratio:
Abandonment requires

DELA CRUZ v. QUIAZON

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DELA CRUZ v. QUIAZON

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DELA CRUZ v. QUIAZON

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

stipulated rental because he had already abandoned the

TOPIC: Termination of Tenancy Relation:

(a) a clear and absolute intention to renounce a right or claim or to

It denied petition and motion for reconsideration.

Case for Petitioner:

Case for Defendant:

You might also like