9/8/2016

CorpusvsGrospe:135297:June8,2000:J.Panganiban:ThirdDivision

THIRDDIVISION
[G.R.No.135297.June8,2000]

GAVINOCORPUZ,petitioner,vs.SpousesGERONIMOGROSPEandHILARIA
GROSPE,respondents.
DECISION
PANGANIBAN,J.:
Thesale,transferorconveyanceoflandreformrightsare,asarule,voidinordertopreventa
circumventionofagrarianreformlaws.However,inthepresentcase,thevoluntarysurrenderor
waiveroftheserightsinfavoroftheSamahangNayonisvalidbecausesuchactionisdeemeda
legallypermissibleconveyanceinfavorofthegovernment.Afterthesurrenderorwaiverofsaidland
reformrights,theDepartmentofAgrarianReform,whichtookcontroloftheproperty,validlyawardedit
toprivaterespondents.
TheCase
BeforetheCourtisaPetitionforReviewonCertiorarioftheMay14,1998Decision[1]andtheAugust
19,1998Resolution[2]inCAGRSPNo.47176,inwhichtheCourtofAppeals(CA)[3]dismissedthe
petitionersappealanddeniedreconsiderationrespectively.
ThedecretalportionoftheassailedDecisionreads:[4]
"INTHELIGHTOFALLTHEFOREGOING,thePetitionisdeniedduecourseandis
herebydismissed.TheDecisionappealedfromisAFFIRMED.Withcostsagainstthe
Petitioner."
TheFacts
PetitionerGavinoCorpuzwasafarmerbeneficiaryundertheOperationLandTransfer(OLT)Program
oftheDepartmentofAgrarianReform(DAR).PursuanttoPresidentialDecree(PD)No.27,hewas
issuedaCertificateofLandTransfer(CLT)overtwoparcelsofagriculturalland(LotNos.3017and
012)withatotalareaof3.3hectaressituatedinSalungat,Sto.Domingo,NuevaEcija.Thelotswere
formerlyownedbyacertainFlorentinoChiocoandregisteredunderTitleNo.126638.
Topayforhiswifeshospitalization,petitionermortgagedthesubjectlandonJanuary20,1982,in
favorofVirginiadeLeon.Whenthecontractperiodexpired,heagainmortgagedittoRespondent
HilariaGrospe,wifeofGeronimoGrospe,foraperiodoffouryears(December5,1986toDecember
5,1990)toguaranteealoanofP32,500.Thepartiesexecutedacontractdenominatedas
"KasunduanSaPagpapahiramNgLupangSakahan,"[5]whichallowedtherespondentstouseor
cultivatethelandduringthedurationofthemortgage.
BeforetheDepartmentofAgrarianReformAdjudicationBoard(DARAB)inCabanatuanCity(Region
III),petitionerinstitutedagainsttherespondentsanactionforrecoveryofpossession.[6]Inhis
Complaint,heallegedthattheyhadenteredthedisputedlandbyforceandintimidationonJanuary10
and11,1991,anddestroyedthepalaythathehadplantedontheland.
Respondents,intheirAnswer,claimedthatthe"Kasunduan"betweenthemandpetitionerallowedthe
formertotakeoverthepossessionandcultivationofthepropertyuntilthelatterpaidhisloan.Instead
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/135297.htm

1/7

9/8/2016

CorpusvsGrospe:135297:June8,2000:J.Panganiban:ThirdDivision

ofpayinghisloan,petitionerallegedlyexecutedonJune29,1989,a"WaiverofRights"[7]
overthelandholdinginfavorofrespondentsinconsiderationofP54,394.
Petitionerdeniedwaivinghisrightsandinterestoverthelandholdingandallegedthathisandhis
childrenssignaturesappearingontheWaiverwereforgeries.
ProvincialAgrarianReformAdjudicator(PARAD)ErnestoP.Tabararuledthatpetitionerabandoned
andsurrenderedthelandholdingtotheSamahangNayonofMalaya,Sto.Domingo,NuevaEcija,
whichhadpassedResolutionNos.16and27recommendingthereallocationofthesaidlotstothe
respondentspouses,whowerethe"mostqualifiedfarmer[s]beneficiaries."[8]
TheDepartmentofAgrarianReformAdjudicationBoard(DARAB),[9]inaDecisionpromulgatedon
October8,1997inDARABCaseNo.1251,affirmedtheprovincialadjudicatorsDecision.[10]
PetitionersMotionforReconsiderationwasdeniedintheResolutiondatedFebruary26,1998.[11]As
earlierstated,petitionersappealwasdeniedbytheCourtofAppeals.
RulingoftheCourtofAppeals
Theappellatecourtruledthatpetitionerhadabandonedthelandholdingandforfeitedhisrightasa
beneficiary.Itrejectedhiscontentionthatalldeedsrelinquishingpossessionofthelandholdingbya
beneficiarywereunenforceable.Section9ofRepublicAct(RA)1199andSection28ofRA6389allow
atenanttovoluntarilyseverhistenancystatusbyvoluntarysurrender.Thewaiverbypetitionerofhis
rightsandhisconformitytotheSamahangNayonResolutionsreallocatingthelandholdingtothe
respondentsareimmutableevidenceofhisabandonmentandvoluntarysurrenderofhisrightsas
beneficiaryunderthelandreformlaws.
Furthermore,petitionerfailedtoprovewithclearandconvincingevidencetheallegedforgeryofhis
andhissonssignatures.
Hence,thisrecourse.[12]
Issues
Feelingaggrieved,thepetitionerallegesinhisMemorandumthattheappellatecourtcommittedthese
reversibleerrors:[13]
"I
xxx[I]nrelyingonthefindingsoffactoftheDARABandPARADasconclusivewhenthe
judgmentisbasedonamisapprehensionoffactsandtheinferencetakenismanifestly
mistaken.
"II
xxx[I]ndisregardingand/orignoringtheclaimofpetitionerthattheallegedwaiver
documentsareallforgeries.
"III
xxx[I]nrulingthatpetitionerhadforfeitedhisrighttobecomeabeneficiaryunderPDNo.
27.
"IV
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/135297.htm

2/7

9/8/2016

CorpusvsGrospe:135297:June8,2000:J.Panganiban:ThirdDivision

xxx[I]nfailingtoruleonthelegalityand/orvalidityofthewaiver/transferaction."
Inshort,thefocalissuesare:(1)Wastheappellatecourtcorrectinfindingthatthesignaturesof
petitionerandhissonsontheWaiverwerenotforged?(2)Assumingarguendothatthesignaturesin
theWaiverweregenuine,wasitnullandvoidforbeingcontrarytoagrarianlaws?(3)Didthe
petitionerabandonhisrightsasabeneficiaryunderPD27?(4)Didhe,byvoluntarysurrender,forfeit
hisrightasabeneficiary?
TheCourtsRuling
ThePetitionisdevoidofmerit.
FirstIssue:FactualFindings
Allegingthataninformationforestafathroughfalsificationwasfiledagainsttherespondents,
petitionerinsiststhathissignatureontheWaiverwasforged.
Wearenotpersuaded.Thefilingofaninformationforestafadoesnotbyitselfprovethatthe
respondentsforgedhissignature.Itonlymeansthatthepublicprosecutorfoundprobablecause
againsttherespondents,butsuchfindingdoesnotconstitutebindingevidenceofforgeryorfraud.[14]
WeagreewiththewellreasonedCArulingonthispoint:[15]
"xxxWearenotswayedbyPetitionersincantationsthathissignatureontheWaiverof
Rightsisaforgery.Inthefirstplace,forgeryisneverpresumed.ThePetitioneris
mandatedtoproveforgerywithclearandconvincingevidence.ThePetitionerfailedto
doso.Indeed,theWaiverofRightsexecutedbythePetitionerwasevenwiththewritten
conformityofhisfour(4)sons(atpage11,Rollo).ThePetitionerhimselfsignedthe
ResolutionoftheBoardofSamahangNayonofMalaya,Sto.Domingo,NuevaEcija,
surrenderinghispossessionofthelandholdingtotheSamahangNayon,(idem,supra).
UnderMemorandumCircularNo.7,datedApril23,1979oftheSecretaryofAgrarian
Reform,transactionsinvolvingtransferofrightsofpossessionandorcultivationof
agriculturallandsarefirstinvestigatedbyateamleaderoftheDARDistrictwhothen
submitstheresultsofhisinvestigationtotheDistrictOfficerwho,inturn,submitshis
reporttotheRegionalDirectorwho,then,actsonsaidreport.Inthepresentrecourse,
therequisiteinvestigationwasconductedandthereportthereonwassubmittedtoand
approvedbytheRegionalDirector.UnderSection3(m),Rule131oftheRulesof
Evidence,publicofficersarepresumedtohaveperformedtheirdutiesregularlyandin
accordancewithlaw."
Asarule,ifthefactualfindingsoftheCourtofAppealscoincidewiththoseoftheDARABan
administrativebodywhichhasacquiredexpertiseonthemattersuchfindingsareaccordedrespect
andwillnotbedisturbedonappeal.[16]Thepresenceortheabsenceofforgerywasanissueoffact
thatwasconvincinglysettledbytheagrarianandtheappellatetribunals.Petitionerutterlyfailedto
convinceusthattheappellatecourthadmisapprehendedthefacts.Quitethecontrary,itsfindings
werewellsupportedbytheevidence.
SecondIssue:Validityofthe"WaiverofRights"
Petitionerinsiststhatagreementspurportedlyrelinquishingpossessionoflandholdingsareinvalidfor
beingviolativeoftheagrarianreformlaws.
Privaterespondentscontendthatpetitionerwasnolongerentitledtorecognitionasafarmer
beneficiarybecauseoftheseriesofmortgageshehadtakenoutovertheland.Theyalsocitehis
"WaiverofRights"andabandonmentofthefarm.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/135297.htm

3/7

9/8/2016

CorpusvsGrospe:135297:June8,2000:J.Panganiban:ThirdDivision

WehavealreadyruledthatthesaleortransferofrightsoverapropertycoveredbyaCertificateof
LandTransferisvoidexceptwhenthealienationismadeinfavorofthegovernmentorthrough
hereditarysuccession.Thisrulingisintendedtopreventareversiontotheoldfeudalsysteminwhich
thelandownersreacquiredvasttractsofland,thusnegatingthegovernmentsprogramoffreeingthe
tenantfromthebondageofthesoil.[17]InTorresv.Ventura,[18]theCourtclearlyheld:
"xxxAssuch[thefarmerbeneficiary]gainedtherightstopossess,cultivateandenjoy
thelandholdingforhimself.Thoserightsoverthatparticularpropertyweregrantedby
thegovernmenttohimandtonoother.Toinsurehiscontinuedpossessionand
enjoymentoftheproperty,hecouldnot,underthelaw,makeanyvalidformoftransfer
excepttothegovernmentorbyhereditarysuccession,tohissuccessors.
"xxx[T]hethenMinistryofAgrarianReformissuedthefollowingMemorandumCircular
[No.7,Seriesof1979,April23,1979]:
"Despitetheaboveprohibition,however,therearereportsthatmanyfarmer
beneficiariesofPD27havetransferredtheownership,rights,and/orpossessionoftheir
farms/homelotstootherpersonsorhavesurrenderedthesametotheirformer
landowners.Allthesetransactions/surrendersareviolativeofPD27andtherefore,null
andvoid."
ThirdIssue:Abandonment
BasedontheinvalidityoftheWaiver,petitionerconcludesthatthePARAD,theDARABandtheCA
erroneouslyruledonthebasisofthesaiddocumentthathehadabandonedorvoluntarilysurrendered
hislandholding.Denyingthatheabandonedtheland,hecontendsthatthetransactionwasasimple
loantoenablehimtopaytheexpensesincurredforhiswifeshospitalization.
Weagree.Abandonment[19]requires(a)aclearandabsoluteintentiontorenouncearightorclaimor
todesertarightorpropertyand(b)anexternalactbywhichthatintentionisexpressedorcarriedinto
effect.[20]Theintentiontoabandonimpliesadeparture,withtheavowedintentofneverreturning,
resumingorclaimingtherightandtheinterestthathavebeenabandoned.[21]
TheCAruledthatabandonmentrequired(a)thetenantsclearintentiontosevertheagricultural
tenancyrelationshipand(b)hisfailuretoworkonthelandholdingfornovalidreason.[22]TheCAalso
deemedthefollowingasformidableevidenceofhisintenttoseverthetenancyrelationship:(a)the
mortgageand(b)hisexpressapprovalandconformitytotheSamahangNayonResolutioninstalling
theprivaterespondentsastenants/farmersbeneficiariesofthelandholding.Wedisagree.
Asearliershown,theWaiverwasvoid.Furthermore,themortgageexpiredafterfouryears.Thus,the
privaterespondentswereobligatedtoreturnpossessionofthelandholdingtothepetitioner.At
bottom,weseeonthepartofthepetitionernoclear,absoluteorirrevocableintenttoabandon.His
surrenderofpossessiondidnotamounttoanabandonmentbecausetherewasanobligationonthe
partofprivaterespondentstoreturnpossessionuponfullpaymentoftheloan.
FourthIssue:VoluntarySurrender
Contrarytothefindingoftheappellatecourt,thepetitioneralsodeniesthathevoluntarilysurrendered
hislandholding.
Hiscontentionisuntenable.ThenullityoftheWaiverdoesnotsavethecaseforhimbecausethereis
aclearshowingthathevoluntarilysurrenderedhislandholdingtotheSamahangNayonwhich,under
thepresentcircumstances,mayqualifyasasurrenderortransfer,tothegovernment,ofhisrights
undertheagrarianlaws.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/135297.htm

4/7

9/8/2016

CorpusvsGrospe:135297:June8,2000:J.Panganiban:ThirdDivision

PD27providesthattitletolandacquiredpursuanttothelandreformprogramshallnotbe
transferableexceptthroughhereditarysuccessionortothegovernment,inaccordancewiththe
provisionsofexistinglawsandregulations.Section8ofRA3844alsoprovidesthat"[t]heagricultural
leaseholdrelationxxxshallbeextinguishedby:xxx(2)[v]oluntarysurrenderofthelandholdingbythe
agriculturallessee,xxx."
Inthiscase,petitionersintentiontosurrenderthelandholdingwasclearandunequivocal.Hesigned
hisconcurrencetotheSamahangNayonResolutionssurrenderinghispossessionofthelandholding.
TheSamahanthenrecommendedtotheteamleaderoftheDARDistrictthattheprivaterespondent
bedesignatedfarmerbeneficiaryofsaidlandholding.
Torepeat,thelandwassurrenderedtothegovernment,nottransferredtoanotherprivateperson.It
wasthegovernment,throughtheDAR,whichawardedthelandholdingtotheprivaterespondents
whoweredeclaredasqualifiedbeneficiariesundertheagrarianlaws.Voluntarysurrender,asamode
ofextinguishmentoftenancyrelations,doesnotrequirecourtapprovalaslongasitisconvincingly
andsufficientlyprovedbycompetentevidence.[23]
PetitionersvoluntarysurrendertotheSamahangNayonqualifiesasasurrenderortransfertothe
governmentbecausesuchactionformspartofthemechanismforthedispositionandthereallocation
offarmholdingsoftenantfarmerswhorefusetobecomebeneficiariesofPD27.UnderMemorandum
CircularNo.880ofthethenMinistryofAgrarianReform,theSamahanshall,uponnoticefromthe
agrarianreformteamleader,recommendothertenantfarmerswhoshallbesubstitutedtoallrights
andobligationsoftheabandoningorsurrenderingtenantfarmer.Besides,thesecooperativesare
establishedtoprovideastrongsocialandeconomicorganizationtoensurethatthetenantfarmers
willenjoyonalastingbasisthebenefitsofagrarianreform.
ThecooperativesworkinclosecoordinationwithDARofficers(regionaldirectors,districtofficers,
teamleadersandfieldpersonnel)toattainthegoalsofagrarianreform(DARMemorandumCircular
No.10,Seriesof1977).TheDepartmentofLocalGovernment(nowtheDepartmentofInteriorand
LocalGovernment)regulatesthemthroughtheBureauofCooperativeDevelopment(Section8,PD
175).TheyalsohaveaccesstofinancialassistancethroughtheCooperativeDevelopmentFund,
whichisadministeredbyamanagementcommitteecomposedoftherepresentativesfromtheDILG,
theCentralBank,thePhilippineNationalBank,theDARandtheDENR(Section6,PD175).
Petitionerinsiststhathisactofallowinganothertopossessandcultivatehislanddidnotamountto
abandonmentorvoluntarysurrender,astherightsofanOLTbeneficiaryarepreservedevenincase
oftransferoflegalpossessionoverthesubjectproperty,asheldinCoconutCooperativeMarketing
Association(Cocoma)v.CourtofAppeals.[24]
Wedisagree.PetitionermisconstruedtheCocomarulingbecausewhatwasprohibitedwasthe
perpetrationofthetenancyorleaseholdrelationshipbetweenthelandlordandthefarmerbeneficiary.
Thecasedidnotruleoutabandonmentorvoluntarysurrenderbytheagriculturaltenantorlesseein
favorofthegovernment.
WHEREFORE,thePetitionisherebyDENIEDandtheassailedDecisionandResolutionAFFIRMED
insofarasitdismissedpetitionersappeal.Costsagainstpetitioner.
SOORDERED.
Melo,(Chairman),Purisima,andGonzagaReyes,JJ.,concur.
Vitug,J.,abroadonofficialbusiness.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/135297.htm

5/7

9/8/2016

CorpusvsGrospe:135297:June8,2000:J.Panganiban:ThirdDivision

[1] Rollo,pp.3136.
[2] Ibid.,p.37.
[3] ThirteenthDivisioncomposedofJJRomeoJ.CallejoSr.(ponente)AngelinaSandovalGutierrez(Divisionchairman)and

MarianoM.Umali(member),bothconcurring.
[4] CADecision,p.6rollo,p.36.
[5]

Ibid.,p.78.
"KASUNDUANSAPAGPAPAHIRAMNGLUPANGSAKAHAN

"PARASAKALAALAMANNANGLAHAT:
........"AkosiGAVINOA.CORPUZ,maysapatnataonggulang,biyudoatsakasalukuyanaynakatirasaMalaya,Sto.Domingo,
NuevaEcijaaytumanggapnghalagangP32,500.00(Tatlumputdalawangliboatlimangdaangpiso)perangPilipinongayongika5
ngDisyembre1986mulakayGng.HELARIAF.GROSPE.Dahilsapagkatanggapkonghalagangnabanggitaybinibigyankosi
Gng.HelariaF.Grospe,mayasawaatmaybahayniGinoongGERONIMOR.GROSPEnglubosnakarapatanparasakahinang
akinglupananagtutukoyngmgasumusunod:
LotNumber......:.....Notavailable
Location...........:.....Salungat,Sto.Domingo,NuevaEcija
ExistingTitle.....:.....Notavailable
LandArea........:.....22,000sq.m.
........"NasakasunduangitoaymaykarapatansiGng.HelariaF.GrospenagamitinosakahinangakinglupasaloobngAPATNA
TAONmulasa5Disyembre1986hanggangDisyembre5,1990atitoaymapapawalangbisalamangayonsabagongkasunduan
namin.PagkataposngapatnataonayibabalikkorinanghalagangP32,500.00(Tatlumpotdalawangliboatlimangdaangpiso)na
akingnahiramkayGng.HelariaF.Grospe.
........"Nasakasunduangitoayisasagawangayonsa(illegible)1986saSto.Domingo,NuevaEcija.
(sgd.)GAVINOA.CORPUZ
(Mayaringlupa)

(sgd.)HELARIAF.GROSPE
(Nagpahiramngsalapi)

SAKAPAHINTULUTANNGMGA
ANAK:
(sgd.)ANACLETOCORPUZ
(sgd.)RAYMUNDOCORPUZ
(sgd.)JIMMYCORPUZ."

SAKSI:
(signatureillegible)
(sgd.)LOVELITOC.ORA

[6] ThecasewasdocketedasDARABCaseNo.1286NE91.
[7]

Rollo,p.79.
"WAIVEROFRIGHTS

"KAMI,mganakalagdasaibabanito,pawangmaymgasapatnagulang,Pilipino,atsakasalukuyanaypawangnaninirahansa
Malaya,Sto.Domingo,NuevaEcija,mataposmakapanumpanangnaaayonsabatasaynagsasalaysayngmgasumusunod:
"Na,kamiangmgatagapagmananglupangsakahinnadatiaynakatalasapangalanngamingina/ama/kapatidnasiG/Gng.
GabinoA.Corpuznamakikilala(na)LoteBlg.3017namaysukatna2.2830ektaryahumigitkumulangnadatingpagaari
niFlorentinoChioconamatatagpuansaMalaya,Sto.Domingo,NE,nanapapaloobsaTituloBlg.126638.
"Na,bilangtagapagmananglupangsakahinnanabanggitsaitaasaminginililipatanglahatngkarapatanatpamomosisyon
kayGERONIMOR.GROSPE.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/135297.htm

6/7

9/8/2016

CorpusvsGrospe:135297:June8,2000:J.Panganiban:ThirdDivision

"Na,ginawanaminitoupangmaisaayossaDepartmentofAgrarianReform(DAR)angpaglilipatngmgakarapatansa
nasabingLotesapangala(n)niGERONIMOA.GROSPE.
"SAKATUNAYANNGLAHATNGITO,kamiaylumagdasakasulatangitongayongika02ngEnero1990,ditosabayanngSto.
Domingo,NuevaEcija.
PANGALANATLAGDA

SEDULABLG.

KINUHASA

NOONG

(Sgd.)RaymundoS.Corpuz

10152182

Sto.Domingo,N.E.

11/06/89

(Sgd.)JimmyS.Corpuz

10152183

Sto.Domingo,N.E.

11/06/89

(Sgd.)AnacletoS.Corpuz

00976119

Sto.Domingo,N.E.

03/20/89

CONFORME:
(sgd.)GABINOA.CORPUZ
SedulaBlg...........10113264
Kinuhasa............Sto.Domingo,N.E.
noong.................June22,1989
xxx...............xxx...............xxx."
[8] Rollo,p.41.
[9] TheBoardwascomposedofSecretaryErnestoD.Garilao,chairmanwithUndersecretariesHectorD.SolimanandArtemioA.
AdasaJr.AssistantSecretariesLorenzoR.Reyes,AugustoP.Quijano,SergioB.SerranoandCliffordC.Burkley,members.
[10] Rollo,p.52.
[11] Ibid,p.59.
[12] ThiscasewasdeemedsubmittedfordecisionuponthisCourtsreceiptoftheMemorandumforthePetitioneronJune14,1999.
RespondentsMemorandumwasreceivedearlier,onMay28,1999.
[13] ThePetitionersMemorandumwassignedbyAtty.NicolasP.LapeaJr.andtheRespondentsMemorandum,byAtty.JaimeP.
Batalla.
[14] Villanuevav.UnitedCoconutPlantersBank,GRNo.138291,March7,2000,p.14.
[15] CADecision,pp.34rollo,pp.3334.
[16] CoconutCooperativeMarketingAssociation,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,164SCRA568,581,August19,1988Jacintov.Courtof
Appeals,87SCRA263,269,December14,1978andDomingov.CourtofAgrarianRelations,4SCRA1151,1156,April28,1962.
[17]

SeePetitionersMemorandum,p.12rollo,p.106,citingGloriaCuhinusayanvda.deOliveretal.v.SesinandoCruzetal.,SP
116191CAR,June22,1981.
.....AlthoughExecutiveOrderNo.228,issuedonJuly17,1987,allowedthetransferofownershipoflandsacquiredbyfarmer
beneficiaryafterfullpaymentofamortization,thereisnoallegationinthiscasethatthepetitionerhasfullyamortizedhispayment.
[18] 187SCRA96,104105,July2,1990,perGancayco,J.
[19] AdministrativeOrderNo.2,issuedMarch7,1994,definedabandonmentorneglectasa"willfulfailureoftheagrarianreform
beneficiary,togetherwithhisfarmhousehold,tocultivate,tillordevelophislandtoproduceanycrop,ortousethelandforany
specificeconomicpurposecontinuouslyforaperiodoftwocalendaryears."
[20] Medranav.OfficeofthePresident,188SCRA818,826,August21,1990.
[21] PartosaJov.CourtofAppeals,216SCRA692,699,December18,1992.
[22] CADecision,p.5rollo,p.35.
[23] Talaverav.CourtofAppeals,182SCRA778,782,February27,1990.
[24] 164SCRA568,584585,August19,1988.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/135297.htm

7/7