Scribd
Upload
168 views2 pages

AGRA Digest - 12. Kasamaka-Canlubang Vs Laguna Estate Devt Corp

This case involved a petition to revoke the conversion of 10 parcels of agricultural land totaling 216 hectares to residential use. The Department of Agrarian Reform partially revoked the conversion order for 8 of the 10 parcels. The respondent filed a motion for reconsideration arguing that the 8 parcels were exempt from coverage under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law as they had been reclassified as non-agricultural by zoning ordinances prior to 1988. The Supreme Court ruled that lands reclassified as non-agricultural by zoning ordinances before 1988 are outside the coverage of the agrarian reform law. It also found that the petitioner failed to prove the respondent did not comply with the conditions of the conversion order.

Uploaded by

Rhea Mae A. Sibala
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
168 views2 pages

AGRA Digest - 12. Kasamaka-Canlubang Vs Laguna Estate Devt Corp

This case involved a petition to revoke the conversion of 10 parcels of agricultural land totaling 216 hectares to residential use. The Department of Agrarian Reform partially revoked the conversion order for 8 of the 10 parcels. The respondent filed a motion for reconsideration arguing that the 8 parcels were exempt from coverage under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law as they had been reclassified as non-agricultural by zoning ordinances prior to 1988. The Supreme Court ruled that lands reclassified as non-agricultural by zoning ordinances before 1988 are outside the coverage of the agrarian reform law. It also found that the petitioner failed to prove the respondent did not comply with the conditions of the conversion order.

Uploaded by

Rhea Mae A. Sibala
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

KASAMAKA-CANLUBANG INC vs LAGUNA ESTATE DEVELOPMENT

CORPORATION, June 9, 2014

FACTS:
 Laguna Estate Development Corp. (LEDC) filed for the convention of 10 parcels of land
consisting of an aggregate area of 216 hectares from agricultural to residential land,
pursuant to RA 3844. Respondent’s request was granted provided that certain conditions
are complied with, one of which was that development of the site shall commence within
2 years from receipt of the order of conversion.
 Kasamaka filed a petition for the revocation of the conversion order, alleging the LEDC
failed to develop the subject parcels of land.
 Then DAR Secretary issued an Order partially revoking the conversion order as 8/10
parcels of land.
 The remaining 2 parcels of land were excluded from the revocation by virtue of a DAR
Exemption which removed said lands from the ambit of RA No. 6657.
 Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration, alleging that the 8 parcels of land in
question are likewise outside the ambit of the CARL on the basis of zoning ordinances
issued by the municipalities concerned reclassifying said lands as non-agricultural.

ISSUE:
1. Are lands classified as non-agricultural on the basis of zoning ordinances (which took effect
prior to CARL) are outside the ambit of CARL?
2. Are municipal zoning ordinances classifying lands to non-agricultural ipso facto change the
nature of said lands?

RULING:
 YES, lands already classified as commercial, industrial or residential before the effectivity
of the CARL, or June15, 1988, are outside the coverage thereof.
 In Natalia Realty, Inc. v. Department of Agrarian Reform, for instance, we held that the
DAR committed grave abuse of discretion when it placed undeveloped portions of land
intended for residential use under the ambit of the CARL.
 Similarly, in Pasong Bayabas Farmers Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, we nullified
the decision of the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB)
declaring the land in dispute as agricultural and, thus, within the coverage of the CARL,
when the same had already been reclassified as residential by several government agencies
prior to the effectivity of the law.
 We likewise held in Junio v. Garilao that properties identified as zonal areas not for
agricultural use prior on June 15, 1988 are exempted from CARL coverage, even without
confirmation or clearance from the DAR. Applying the doctrines cited above, it cannot be
denied that the disputed lands are likewise outside the ambit of the CARL. As mentioned
previously, by virtue of zoning ordinances issued by the Municipality of Calamba, Laguna,
as accepted by the Sangguniang Bayan of Cabuyao and approved by the Human
Settlements Regulatory Commission, the subject lands were effectively converted into
residential areas. These ordinances were issued and accepted in 1979 and 1980, or before
the effectivity of the CARL which took effect on June 15, 1988. It necessarily follows,
therefore, that the properties herein can no longer be subject to compulsory coverage of the
CARL.

NUMBER 2
 YES, even from a plain reading of the order of conversion in this case, that the respondent’s
application for converting the disputed lands from agricultural to residential is granted. As
a consequence of such approval, the fact that the subject property is deemed zoned and
reclassified as residential upon compliance with the conditions imposed cannot be
questioned.
 Petitioner failed to sufficiently prove respondent’s non-compliance with the condition
provided by the conversion order to commence the development of the subject lands herein.
Petitioner further failed to refute the application of the rule that lands already classified as
commercial, industrial or residential before the effectivity of the CARL, or June 15, 1988,
are outside the coverage thereof. In the absence, therefore, of any convincing proof that the
CA committed errors in its appreciation of facts, this Court will refrain from disturbing the
ruling of the same.

You might also like