August 26, 1994

DAR OPINION NO. 63-94

ATTY . EDGAR G. HIGWIT

Head Agent

Narcotics Division

National Bureau of Investigation

Taft Avenue, Manila

Dear Atty. Higwit:

This has reference to your request for opinion on whether or not the son of a deceased tenant is entitled to some enumeration before he can be evicted from the farmlot of his deceased father, as the landowner intends to sell the same. You stated in your letter that Marcos Blanca and his wife Pilar were instituted as tenants on a 5.387-hectare coconut land at Parik, Talinga, Juban, Sorsogon and that said Marcos, Blanca is now deceased. In her sworn statement dated 5 August 1992, the widow, Pilar Blanca, stated among others, that her husband died in 1984; that she continued residing in the farmlot with her son Bernado and the latter's family; and that due to old age and poor health she decided to return said farmlot to the landowner.

Under Section 9 of RA 3844, as amended (the Agrarian, Reform Code), in case of death of the agricultural lessee (such as in the specific situation under consideration) the leasehold shall continue between the agricultural lessor and the person who can cultivate the landholding personally, chosen by the agricultural lessor within one month from such death or permanent incapacity, from among the following: a) the surviving spouse; b) the eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; c) the next eldest descendant or descendants in the order of their ages. In case the agricultural lessor fails to exercise his choice within the period stated, the priority shall be in accordance with the order established.

It is noted that Marcos Blanca died in 1984. However, your letter failed to state who took over cultivation of the farmlot from the tenant's death in 1984 until 1992 when Pilar executed the sworn statement of surrender of said farmlot. Neither can we judiciously determine whether or not Bernardo's claim of tenancy has legal basis. We cannot discount the possibility, that it was Bernardo who took over the cultivation of the farmlot after his father's death, in which case tenancy may have peen established in his favor and the surrender made by his mother Pilar will not militate against his rights as such tenant, including his right to security of tenure. Considering the insufficiency of material facts upon which a judicious evaluation of the matter can be based, we advise that a conference between the landowner or her representative and Bernardo before the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer at Juban, Sorsogon be held to ascertain the facts regarding the latter's claim of tenancy.

As regards the intention of the landowner to sell her 5.387-hectare coconut land, Section 6 of RA 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or CARL) provides that the sale of agricultural land in excess of the 5-hectare retention of the landowner is null and void. Otherwise stated, only the retained area of the landowner may be sold by her, which should not exceed 5 hectares and only in favor of a vendee whose total agricultural land does not exceed the 5-hectare limit including the property purchased pursuant to paragraph l Section 70 of CARL. However, the inclusion of the .387-hectare in the sale may be allowed, Provided that said 5.387-hectare lot is the only land owned by the Vendor, and the vendee likewise owns no other agricultural land except the lot sold.

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) HECTOR D. SOLIMAN
Assistant Secretary
Legal Affairs Office