G.R. NO.
178312 : January 30, 2013
LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. HEIRS OF SPOUSES JORJA RIGORSORIANO AND MAGIN SORIANO, NAMELY: MARIVEL S. CARANDANG AND JOSEPH
SORIANO, Respondents.
BERSAMIN, J.:
FACTS:
Marivel Carandang and Joseph Soriano are the children of the late Sps. Jorja Rigor- Soriano
and Magin Soriano, the owners of the two parcels of land located in Macabucod, Aliaga,
Nueva Ecija. The properties became subject to Operation Land Transfer (OLT) and were
valued
by
the
Land
Bank
and
the
Department
of
Agrarian
Reform
(DAR)
at
P10,000.00/hectare. Contending that such valuation was too low compared to existing
valuations of agricultural lands, the heirs commenced an action for just compensation. They
asked that a final valuation of the properties be pegged at P1,800,000.00, based on
Administrative Order No. 61, Series of 1992 and R.A. No. 6657.
cjuris
The RTC ordered Land Bank to pay the heirs the amount P1,227,571.10 as just
compensation.
cjuris
Land Bank appealed to the CA. The CA denied the petition.
Hence, Land Bank appealed to the Supreme Court.
cjuris
cjuris
During the pendency of the appeal, both parties entered into an agreement re-evaluating
the cost of the parcels of land. Thus, Land Bank submitted a manifestation informing the
High Court that the parties have already filed their Joint Motion to Approve submitting their
Agreement dated November 29, 2012.
cjuris
ISSUE: Whether or not the present appeal to the Supreme Court should be dismissed?
HELD: The appeal should be closed and terminated.
cjuris
CIVIL LAW: compromise; contract
The Agreement was a compromise that the parties freely and voluntarily entered into for the
purpose of finally settling their dispute in this case. Under Art. 2028 of the Civil Code, a
compromise is a contract whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a
litigation or put an end to one already commenced. Accordingly, a compromise is either
judicial, if the objective is to put an end to a pending litigation, or extrajudicial, if the
objective is to avoid a litigation.
cjuris
As a contract, a compromise is perfected by mutual consent. However, a judicial
compromise, while immediately binding between the parties upon its execution, is not
executory until it is approved by the court and reduced to a judgment. The validity of a
compromise is dependent upon its compliance with the requisites and principles of contracts
dictated by law. Also, the terms and conditions of a compromise must not be contrary to
law, morals, good customs, public policy and public order. A review of the terms of the
Agreement, indicates that it is a judicial compromise because the parties intended it to
terminate their pending litigation by fully settling their dispute.
