Wrong Mode of Appeal

The proper mode of appeal from decisions of Regional Trial Courts sitting as Special Agrarian Courts is by petition for review under Rule 42 of the Rules of Court and not through an ordinary appeal under Rule 41. The reference to the Rules of Court means that the specific rules for petitions for review in the Rules of Court and other relevant procedures in appeals filed before the Court of Appeals shall be followed in appealed decisions of Special Agrarian Courts. Considering that RA6657 cannot and does not provide the details on how the petition for review shall be conducted, a suppletory application of the pertinent provisions of the Rules of Court is necessary. In fact Section 61 of RA6657 uses the word "review" to designate the mode by which the appeal is to be effected. The reference therefore by Section 61 to the Rules of Court only means that the procedure under Rule 42 for petitions for review is to be followed for appeals in agrarian cases.

The adoption of a petition for review as the mode of appeal is justified in order to "hasten" the resolution of cases involving issues on just compensation of expropriated lands under RA6657. The need for absolute dispatch in the determination of just compensation. Such objective is more in keeping with the nature of a petition for review. Unlike an ordinary appeal, a petition for review dispenses with the filing of a notice of appeal or completion of records as requisites before any pleading is submitted.

A resort to a wrong mode of appeal is fatal to one's cause as it results in the decision appealed from in becoming final and executory. Although appeal is an essential part of our judicial process, the right thereto is not a natural right but is merely a statutory privilege (Land Bank of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals and Elizabeth Diaz, G.R. No. 190660. April 11, 2011).