Remedios L. Vda. de Lacsamana v. Domingo M. Cabangon, et al.
Supreme Court
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-19473 November 28, 1964
REMEDIOS L. VDA. DE LACSAMANA,petitioner,
vs.
HON. DOMINGO M. CABANGON, Court of Agrarian Relations, Third Regional District, and RUPERTO ARELLANO,respondents.
R E S O L U T I O N
BARRERA,J.:
From the decision of the Court of Agrarian Relations (in Case No. 478- T'58) directing her to reinstate therein petitioner tenant Ruperto Arellano to the landholding involved in the case, and to pay to the latter the share in the produce of the land which the tenant failed to receive due to his alleged illegal ejectment therefrom, the landowner Remedios L. Vda. de Lacsamana filed the present petition for review, claiming that the trial court erred, among others, in holding that petitioner tenant was illegally ejected from the landholding, although it was found that the conversion of the crop to be planted therein from palay to sugar cane, was justified; in granting damages to the tenant in spite of the finding of the court that the tenant objected to the conversion of the crop as desired by the landowner, and refused the offer of the latter, of another land to work on in the same locality; and in treating the case as one for ejectment instead of an exercise by the landowner of his managerial right under Section 25 of Republic Act 1199, as amended by Republic Act 2263.
From the foregoing assigned errors, it is evident that to resolve the issues raised herein, it would be necessary to review the evidence presented during the trial and pass upon the factual findings of the lower court. The matter, therefore, properly falls within the appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals.1
WHEREFORE, this case is hereby remanded to the Court of Appeals, for proper proceedings. So ordered.
Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes, Makalintal, Bengzon J.P., and Zaldivar, JJ.,concur.
Footnote
1See Sec. 156, Rep. Act 3844; Supreme Court Minute resolution of September 26, 1963.
Related decisions
Decisions on similar questions that neither cites the other: they rely on the same precedents, are cited together, or apply the same law.
- L-62626 July 18 et al.1984both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
- L-62275 June 22 et al.1984both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
- L-54290 May 31 v. Pangilinan1988both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
- L-46281-83 August 19 v. CA1988both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
- L-36654 March 3 v. CA1987both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
- L-28643 November 28 v. CA1969both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
- L-23564 November 28 v. Galleta1969both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
- L-21283 October 22 v. Relations1966both apply RA 1199, RA 2263
Laws it applies
Links and connections are read from the text by pattern matching, not checked by a person. A guide, not a finding.