LANDBANK VS COURT OF APPEALS

The Court declared that, as explicitly provided by Sec. 16(e), R.A. 6657, the
deposit of compensation must be in “cash” or in “Land Bank bonds”, not in
any other form, and certainly not in a “trust account”. While the Association
ruling allowed a deviation in the traditional mode of payment other than
cash, this did not dispense with the settled rule.that there must be payment
of just compensation before the title to the expropriated property is
transferred. Thus, in the Resolution on the Motion for Reconsideration, 258
SCRA 404, the Court said that upon receipt by the landowner of the
corresponding payment or, in case of rejection or no response from the
landowner, upon the deposit with an accessible bank designated by DAR of
the compensation in cash or in Land Bank bonds in accordance with this
Act, the DAR shall take immediate possession of the land
and shall request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a Transfer
Certificate of Title in the name of the Republic of the Philippines. The
provision is very clear and unambiguous, foreclosing any doubt as to allow
an expanded construction, which would include the opening of “trust
accounts” within the coverage of the term “deposit”.

Facts:
Yap and Santiago are landowners whose landholdings were acquired by the
DAR, subjecting it for transfer to qualified CARP beneficiaries. Aggrieved by
the compensation valuation of DAR and LBP, respondents filed a petition for
certiorari and mandamus with a preliminary mandatory injunction. The case
was referred to CA for proper determination and disposition.

Respondents argued that DAR and LBP committed grave abuse of discretion
and acted without jurisdiction when they opened trusts accounts in lieu of
the depositing in cash or bonds, before the lands was taken and the titles
are cancelled. Respondents claim that before the taking of the property, the
compensation must be deposited in cash or bonds.

DAR, maintained that the certificate of deposit was a substantial compliance

with the rule on taking and compensation. LBP confirms that the certificate
of deposit expresses "reserved/deposited".

CA ruled in favor of Yap and Santiago. DAR filed a petition.  DAR, maintain
that the word "deposit" referred merely to the act of depositing and in no
way excluded the opening of a trust account as form of deposit.
_________________________________________________________________________
Facts:

Private respondents are land owners who are only given trust
accounts by DAR as just compensation for their land.
Respondents argued that DAR and LBP committed grave abuse of
discretion and acted without jurisdiction when they opened trusts
accounts in lieu of the depositing in cash or bonds, before the lands
was taken and the titles are cancelled. Respondents claim that
before the taking of the property, the compensation must be
deposited in cash or bonds.
Issue: Whether or not the trust account is a form of just
compensation?

No. The court ruled that the deposit of compensation must be in

“cash” or in “land bank bonds”, not in any other form, and certainly
not in a “trust account”.