Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM

ADJUDICATION BOARD
Office of the Provincial Adjudicator
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

ARMANDO L. AGGARAO,
Plaintiff,

-versus- DARAB CASE No. 0202-1679-2018

For: EJECTMENT

NESTOR RANJO,
Defendant.

x----------------------------------------------------------x

REPLY
(to the COMMENT/OPPOSITION)

Plaintiff, through the undersigned counsel, and unto this

Honorable Adjudication Board, most respectfully states THAT:

1. On___________, this Honorable Board issued an Order in the

above-captioned case directing the Defendant to file his
Comment/Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion For Supervision of
Harvest within the period of ten (10) days.

2. On 13 November 2019, Plaintiff received the

Comment/Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion For Supervision of
Harvest.
3. It is respectfully manifested that the Honarable Board that it
issued its Order on _____________ and Defendant did not
indicate the timeliness in his Comment/Opposition considering
that Plaintiff received the latter’s Comment/Opposition on 13
November 2019 or

4. Hence, the Defendant’s Comment/Opposition was filed out of

time.

5. Considering but not granting that Defendant’s

Comment/Opposition was filed on time, it is most respectfully
argued before this Honorable Board that Defendant’s
contentions are baseless and are bereft of merit.

6. In retrospect, the Provincial Sheriff of the Office of the Provincial

Adjudicator, invited the defendant several times, before the
office of the MARO of Enrile, Cagayan to finally settle his
obligations to the Plaintiff by virtue of the Writ of Execution
issued by the Honorable Board on 17 May 2019.

7. The defendant however, failed and deliberately refused on all

occasions to appear before the Office of the MARO despite
being formally commanded to appear to the said office.

8. The defendant, not once appeared before the Office of the

MARO, nor communicated its intention to fulfill his obligation to
the Plaintiff.

9. Plaintiff therefore has no other recourse but to pray before the

Honorable Board for the issuance of an ORDER for the
Provincial Sheriff to supervise the harvest of the landholding
under the possession of the defendant up until such time that
the defendant shall have fully paid the back rentals due to the
plaintiff.
10. Moreover, Defendant’s contention that the lease rental per
cropping due to the landowner per cropping season should be
eight cavan’s per hectare per cropping is misplaced and
baseless.

11. It respectfully manifested that it was never been set to eight

cavan’s per hectare per cropping.

12. The issue on on how many cavans should the defendant need
to pay the plaintiff needs to be thresh out during the execution
of the Agricultural Leasehold Agreement between the Palintiff
and Defendant which never transpired because defendant
deliberately failed to appear before the Office of the MARO of
Enrile, Cagayan.

13. Thus, it is most respectfully submitted that Defendant’s

continuous, deliberate and blatant refusal to comply with the
Decision of this Honorable Board is contemptuous and
contumacious to the prejudice of the Plaintiff.

14. Moreover, defendant’s motion for the rectification of the

reckoning time for computation of the back rental is again
bereft of merit.

15. Under the Decision of the Honorable Board, the payment of

the back rentals due from the defendant should reckoned
from crop year 2015 since this was the year the defendant
started to deliver the lease rentals due to the previous land
owners.

16. Hence, by way of subrogation, plaintiff, being the new owner,

was subrogated of all the rights of the previous land owner. This
includes the collection of the back rental reckoned from year
2015 due to then previous land owner.
 17. Thus, plaintiff has the right to collect back rentals from crop
year 2015 up to crop year 2018 as per the Honorable Board’s
Decision.

18. Considering but not granting that defendant’s motion for

rectification of the reckoning time for computation of back
rental is given due course, this motion will necessarily fail.

19. It is worthy to note that the Decision of the Honorable became

final and executory and attained finality.

20. It is a fundamental principle that a judgment that lapses into

finality becomes immutable and unalterable. The primary
consequence of this principle is that the judgment may no
longer be modified or amended by any court in any manner
even if the purpose of the modification or amendment is to
correct perceived errors of law or fact. This principle known as
the doctrine of immutability of judgment is a matter of sound
public policy which rests upon the practical consideration that
every litigation must come to an end.1

21. Thus, defendant’s motion to rectify the reckoning period of

payment of back rentals is bereft of merit. The defendant could
have moved for a motion for reconsideration of the Decision of
the Honorable Board which he did not.

22. Under the doctrine of immutability of judgment, defendant’s

motion will necessarily fail.

1
National Housing Authority v. Court of Appeals, 731 Phil. 400, 405-406 [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe,
Second Division].
 23. Considering the foregoing, the Plaintiff most respectfully prays
of this Honorable Board to deny the Defendant’s
Comment/Opposition.

PRAYER

Wherefore, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed

of the Honorable Board to:

1. Issue an ORDER directing the Provincial Sheriff to supervise the

harvest of the landholding.
2. Issue an ORDER directing the Provincial Sheriff to allocate 25%
of the net harvest to the back rentals due to the Plaintiff and
another 25% of the net harvest to be allocated for the current
rentals of the landholding in the possession of the defendant.

Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

Tuguegarao City, Cagayan. 15October 2019.

CUMIGAD LAW OFFICES

2nd Floor, J&C Lasam-Villrose Bldg., 10-A Arellano Street,
Ugac Sur, Tuguegarao City

ROTCIV R. CUMIGAD
Roll No. 68067
IBP O.R No. 073445/02-11-19/CAGAYAN
PTR No. 2509938/02-04-2019/TUGUEGARAO CITY
MCLE Governing Board Order No. 1, Series of 2008
(MCLE Compliant-compliance number pending)
MARY GRACE V. PULIDO
SADI
 DRAZEN BORG PIANO
Roll No. 69444
IBP No. 069957/01-18/19/Province of Cagayan
PTR No. 2509938/02-04-2019/Tuguegarao City
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0018548(Valid until April 22, 2022)

NOTICE

Clerk of the Board

Department of Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

NESTOR RANJO
SitioNaruang, Enrile, Cagayan

ATTY. FRANCIELLE B. PURUGANAN-AGUILA

PAO Hall of Justice, Carig Sur
Tuguegarao City

Greetings!

Please take notice that I am submitting the instant Motion for

the consideration and approval of the Honorable Board on a date
subject to the availability of the Honorable Board’s calendar with
due notice of hearing to the parties.

DRAZEN BORG PIANO

EXPLANATION

Due to the distance between the office of the undersigned

counsel and the counsels for the other parties and the dearth of a
messenger, personal service of Motion is impracticable, hence,
service is made through registered mail.

DRAZEN BORG PIANO

Copy furnished:

OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ADJUDICATOR

Department of Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

NESTOR RANJO
SitioNaruang, Enrile, Cagayan

ATTY. FRANCIELLE B. PURUGANAN-AGUILA

PAO Hall of Justice, Carig Sur
Tuguegarao City