EN
BANC
GREGORIO
ATIENZA,
ET AL.,
Petitioners,
G.
R.
Nos. L-20028 & L-20029
April
30, 1966
-versus-
HONORABLE
COURT
OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS,
ETC., ET
AL.,
Respondents.
R
E S O L U
T I O N
BENGZON,
C.J.
:
Petition for Review on
Certiorari.
Before
the Court of
Agrarian Relations, Fifth Regional District, forty-four share-tenants
of
the Ascue spouses claimed for the refund of certain amounts which the
spouses
had deducted from the said tenant's share as hauling expenses of the
sugar-cane
produced in their landholdings to the Central Azucarera Don Pedro.
The issue was submitted
for decision upon a stipulation of facts "and of all other facts
admitted
in the pleadings and in the previous hearings upon submission of
itemized
list of additional hauling expenses charged."
Such hauling expenses
[one-half] had been charged against the share-tenants as part of the
expenses
of production, the spouses having shouldered the other half. And the
payment
of such expenses resulted from an agreement which the spouses had with
Central Azucarera Don Pedro.
The share-tenants
object
to paying such expenses because, they argue, they were not parties to
agreement
with the Central Azucarera.
The Court found, and
so declared, that under the circumstances, the share-tenants were
represented
by the spouses in their dealings with the Central Azucarera. Wherefore,
the Court denied the claims for refund. Hence, this appeal by the
tenants
by way of certiorari.
In their Petition for
Certiorari, they assert
that they had established by their evidence
that
the agreement between them and the spouses was that all the expenses of
hauling the sugar-cane, shall be for the exclusive account of the
spouses
[p. 4 petition]. And they cite pages of the stenographic note and the
testimony
of Nicholas Endoso [p. 2, memo of petitioners], on the alleged verbal
agreement
to that effect. Other factual issues are raised, which it is not now
necessary
to enumerate.
WHEREFORE, as the
matter
involves questions of fact, and the monetary demand amounts to about
five
thousand pesos only [p. 8, Petition], this record is referred to the
Court
of Appeals for decision, under the provision of Sec. 156 of the Land
Reform
Code [Republic Act 3844]. So ordered.
Justices Bautista
Angelo,
J.B.L. Reyes, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, J.P. Bengzon, Zaldivar and
Sanchez,
JJ., concur.
Messrs. Justices
Concepcion
and Barrera took no part. |