CASE of PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK V. CA
CASE of PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK V. CA
ISSUE: Wether the DAR or the RTC has jurisdiction Citing Republic v. Court of Appeals,9 this rule is an acknowledgment by the DARAB that the
power to decide just compensation cases for the taking of lands under R.A. No. 6657 is
PETITIONER’S ARGUMENT ON THE ISSUE: Phil. Veterans Bank contended that DAR vested in the courts. It is error to think that, because of Rule XIII, §11, the original and
adjudicators had no jurisdiction to determine the just compensation for the taking of exclusive jurisdiction given to the courts to decide petitions for determination of just
compensation has thereby been transformed into an appellate jurisdiction. It only means
lands under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program because such jurisdiction is
that, in accordance with settled principles of administrative law, primary jurisdiction is
vested in the Regional Trial Courts. vested in the DAR as an administrative agency to determine in a preliminary manner the
reasonable compensation to be paid for the lands taken under the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program, but such determination is subject to challenge in the courts.
The jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts is not any less "original and exclusive" because
the question is first passed upon by the DAR, as the judicial proceedings are not a
continuation of the administrative determination. For that matter, the law may provide
that the decision of the DAR is final and unappealable. Nevertheless, resort to the courts
cannot be foreclosed on the theory that courts are the guarantors of the legality of
administrative action.10