Land Bank of The Philippines, Petitioner, FELICIANO F. WYCOCO, Respondent. G.R. No. 146733 January 13, 2004

LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES,
petitioner,
vs.
FELICIANO F. WYCOCO, respondent.
G.R. No. 146733 January 13, 2004
FACTS:
Feliciano F. Wycoco is the registered owner of a 94.1690 hectare unirrigated and untenanted
rice land situated in the Sitios of Ablang, Saguingan and Pinamunghilan, Barrio of San Juan, Licab, Nueva
Ecija.
In line with the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) of the government, Wycoco
voluntarily offered to sell the land to the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) for P14.9 million.
After DAR’s evaluation and determination of the just compensation by the LBP, a notice of intention
to acquire 84.5690 hectares of the property amounting P1,342,667.466 was sent to wycoco, amount
offered was later raised to P2,594,045.39 and, upon review, was modified to P2,280,159.82.
Wycoco rejected the offer, prompting the DAR to indorse the case to the Department of Agrarian
Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) for the purpose of fixing the just compensation in a summary
administrative proceeding.
Thereafter, the DARAB requested LBP to open a trust account in the name of Wycoco and deposited the
compensation offered by DAR.
In the meantime, the property was distributed to farmer-beneficiaries.
DARAB required the parties to submit their respective memoranda or position papers in
support of their claim.
however, decided to forego with the filing of the required pleadings, and instead filed case
for determination of just compensation to the Regional Trial Court of Cabanatuan City, Branch 23.
Meanwhile, DAR and LBP filed their respective answers before the special agrarian court in Agrarian
Case No. 91 (AF), contending that the valuation of Wycoco’s property was in accordance with law and he
cannot exhaust administrative remedies due to his failure for not participating in the summary
administrative proceedings before the DARAB which has primary jurisdiction over determination of land
valuation
Trial court conducted a pre-trial, however parties prayed to terminate the pre-trial in which the trial
court approved said prayer.
Wycoco presented the following evidence in support of his claim: (1) Transfer Certificate of Title No. NT-
206422; (2) Notice of Land Valuation dated June 18, 1992; and (3) letter dated July 10, 1992 rejecting the
counter-offer of LBP and DAR.16 On the other hand, DAR and LBP presented the Land Valuation
Worksheets.
On November 14, 1995, the trial court rendered a decision in favor of Wycoco. It ruled that the court
took judicial notice thereof and fixed the compensation for the entire 94.1690 hectare land at 142,500
per hectare or a total of 13,428,082since it is of public knowledge that the prevailing market value of
agricultural lands sold in licab, nueva ecija is from 135-150 per hectare. It also awarded Wycoco actual
damages for unrealized profits plus legal interest.
ISSUE:
WON THE TRIAL COURTS ACTION IN TAKING JUDICIAIL NOTICE TO FIX THE COMPENSATION FOR
THE ENTIRE LAND JUSTIFIABLE?
RULING:
Trial court should have appraised the parties of its intention to take judicial notice
thereof. Section 3, Rule 129 of the Rules on Evidence provides:
Sec. 3. Judicial Notice, When Hearing Necessary. – During the trial, the court, on its
own initiative, or on request of a party, may announce its intention to take judicial
notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon.
After trial and before judgment or on appeal, the proper court, on its own initiative, or
on request of a party, may take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be
heard thereon if such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case.
The trial court should have allowed the parties to present evidence thereon instead of practically
assuming a valuation without basis. While market value may be one of the bases of determining just
compensation, there are still factors in determining the fair market value of a property example: the
cost of acquisition, the current value of like properties, its size, shape, location, as well as the tax
declarations thereon.33 Since these factors were not considered, a remand of the case for
determination of just compensation is necessary. The power to take judicial notice is to be
exercised by courts with caution especially where the case involves a vast tract of land. Care
must be taken; and every reasonable doubt on the subject should be promptly resolved in
the negative. Judicial notice is not judicial knowledge. The mere personal knowledge of the
judge is not the judicial knowledge of the court, and he is not authorized to make his
individual knowledge of a fact, not generally or professionally known, the basis of his action.
Therefore, Agrarian Case No. 91 (AF) is REMANDED to the Regional Trial Court of Cabanatuan
City, Branch 23, for the determination of just compensation.

Land Bank of The Philippines, Petitioner, FELICIANO F. WYCOCO, Respondent. G.R. No. 146733 January 13, 2004

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Land Bank of The Philippines, Petitioner, FELICIANO F. WYCOCO, Respondent. G.R. No. 146733 January 13, 2004

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

Land Bank of The Philippines, Petitioner, FELICIANO F. WYCOCO, Respondent. G.R. No. 146733 January 13, 2004

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES,

G.R. No. 146733 January 13, 2004

You might also like