Case Digest (G.R. No. 142304)
Facts:
On December 21, 1993, the City Council of Manila enacted Ordinance No. 7833 authorizing the expropriation of several parcels in Tondo, Manila’s First District, including Lot 1-C of 343.10 sqm covered by TCT No. 138272 originally issued to Feliza De Guia. After her death, her estate was partitioned among her heirs by the RTC, Branch 53, Manila on May 8, 1986. In 1989, Alberto De Guia, one of her heirs, died and his share, including Lot 1-C, was assigned to Edgardo De Guia, who received TCT No. 215593 on April 15, 1994. On July 29, 1994 the property was transferred to Lee Kian Hui (TCT No. 217018) and subsequently sold on January 24, 1996 to Demetria De Guia (TCT No. 226048). On September 26, 1997, petitioner City of Manila filed an amended complaint for eminent domain in Civil Case No. 94-72282 before RTC, Branch 16, Manila, naming as defendants the Serrano siblings—Oscar, Felicitas, Jose, Benjamin, Estelita, Leonora, and Adelaida—asserting public purpose under its Land Use DevelCase Digest (G.R. No. 142304)
Facts:
- Enactment of Expropriation Ordinance
- On December 21, 1993, City Council of Manila passed Ordinance No. 7833 authorizing expropriation of properties in Tondo, First District, covered by TCT Nos. 70869, 105201, 105202, and 138273.
- One parcel, Lot 1-C (343.10 sqm), was covered by TCT No. 138272 originally issued in the name of Feliza De Guia.
- Chain of Title of Lot 1-C
- 1986: Feliza De Guia’s estate settled by compromise approved by RTC Branch 53, Manila (May 8, 1986).
- 1989: Death of Alberto De Guia; his heirs partitioned his share, assigning Lot 1-C to Edgardo De Guia.
- April 15, 1994: TCT No. 215593 issued to Edgardo De Guia.
- July 29, 1994: Lot transferred to Lee Kian Hui, resulting in TCT No. 217018.
- January 24, 1996: Demetria De Guia purchased Lot 1-C; TCT No. 226048 issued.
- Expropriation Proceedings and Lower Courts’ Actions
- September 26, 1997: City of Manila filed amended complaint for eminent domain (Civil Case No. 94-72282) in RTC Branch 16, Manila, naming the Serrano respondents among others.
- November 12, 1997: Respondents answered, claiming bona fide occupancy for 40+ years, exemption under R.A. 7279 (residential land ≤ 300 sqm), and sought cancellation of the annotation on TCT No. 226048.
- October 9, 1998: Trial court ordered petitioner to deposit ₱1,825,241.00 (assessed value).
- December 15, 1998: Upon deposit, trial court issued writ of possession in favor of petitioner.
- Respondents filed a Rule 65 petition with the Court of Appeals alleging grave abuse in issuing the writ and asserting R.A. 7279 exemptions and other statutory prerequisites.
- November 16, 1999: Court of Appeals granted the petition, held Lot 1-C exceeded 300 sqm but ruled City must exhaust other acquisition modes under Secs. 9–10 of R.A. 7279 before expropriation, and perpetually enjoined further proceedings.
- February 23, 2000: Court of Appeals denied petitioner’s motions for reconsideration.
- Petitioner elevated the case by petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Was a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 the proper remedy for respondents to challenge the RTC’s interlocutory order issuing a writ of possession, or should they have resorted to a Rule 45 petition for review?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in applying Sections 9 and 10 of R.A. 7279 and the Filstream doctrine at the interlocutory stage where only a writ of possession had been issued?
- Was the issuance of a perpetual injunction against further expropriation proceedings proper, given that the writ of possession was ministerial under Rule 67 upon deposit of the assessed value?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)