FERNANDO GALLARDO, petitioner-appellant,
JUAN BORROMEO, respondent-appellee.
Joselito Coloma for petitioner.
Bureau of Agrarian Legal Assistance for respondent.
Appeal by certiorari to review the decision of Court of Appeals affirming in toto the decision dated April 2, 1971 of the Court of Agrarian Relations, dismissing the complaint which the petitioner Fernando Gallardo filed on to terminate the leasehold of the respondent tenant so he (plaintfff) may cultivate it himself as he had retired from his government job as a letter carrier. The respondent alleged that the petitioner has no knowledge of filing and that his only purpose is to eject the respondent filing from the landholding. Applying Section 7, Republic Act 6389, it held that the landowner’s desire to cultivate the land himself is not a valid ground for dispossessing the tenant.
Whether or not the Court of Appeals correctly gave retroactive application to Section 7 of RA 6389.
NO. Decision of Court of Appeals and Agrarian Court were set aside. Respondent-appellee ordered to vacate leasehold and surrender its possession to petitioner-appelant.
Since Congress failed to express intention to make RA 6389 retroactive, it may not apply to ejectment cases then already pending adjudication by the courts. A sound canon of statutory construction is that statute operates prospectively only and never retroactively, unless the legislative intent to threatened contrary is made manifest either by the express terms of the statute or by necessary implication. … No court will hold a statute to be retroactive when the legislature has not said so.
Article 4 of the New Civil Code provides that “laws shall have no retroactive effect unless therein otherwise provided,”