Case Digest (G.R. No. 94545)
Facts:
National Power Corporation filed a complaint for expropriation on December 2, 1997, to acquire an easement over portions of three parcels owned by YCLA Sugar Development Corporation, totaling 5,846 square meters; the RTC issued a writ of possession on June 4, 1999. The RTC appointed a Board of Commissioners, which reported P500.00 per sq m on May 2, 2001 and, after an ocular inspection, P1,000.00 per sq m on September 15, 2003; the RTC adopted the latter and awarded P5,786,000.00 on May 12, 2005, and the Court of Appeals on September 23, 2010 reduced the award to P900.00 per sq m. The petition for review under Rule 45 followed.Issues:
- Did the RTC and the Court of Appeals have sufficient basis to fix the amount of just compensation based on the Board of Commissioners Report dated September 15, 2003?
- Could the Court adopt the Board's earlier May 2, 2001 recommendation of P500.00 per sq m as the proper measure of just compensation?
Ruling:
The petition was partly granted. Th Case Digest (G.R. No. 94545)
Facts:
- Parties and statutory authority
- National Power Corporation (Petitioner; "NPC"), a government-owned and controlled corporation, was created to develop hydroelectric power and was authorized to exercise the power of eminent domain under Republic Act No. 6395, Section 3(h).
- YCLA Sugar Development Corporation (Respondent; "YCLA") was the registered owner of three parcels of land in Puerto Galera, Oriental Mindoro, covered by Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. T-5209, T-21280 and T-78583.
- Subject property and project
- NPC required an easement/right-of-way over portions of YCLA’s properties to complete its 69 KV Calapan-Mamburao Island Grid Project in Puerto Galera.
- The aggregate area of YCLA’s properties affected by the transmission lines was 5,846 square meters.
- Commencement of expropriation proceedings and possession
- NPC filed a Complaint for expropriation against YCLA and others on December 2, 1997, seeking an easement of right-of-way.
- YCLA filed an Answer on July 9, 1998, alleging dismissal for failure to allege public use.
- On April 30, 1999, the parties moved for constitution of a Board of Commissioners to determine just compensation; the RTC ordered constitution of the Board the same date.
- On June 4, 1999, the RTC, acting on NPC’s ex parte motion, issued a writ of possession placing NPC in possession of the subject properties.
- Commissioners’ reports and proceedings on valuation
- The Board of Commissioners submitted a Report dated May 2, 2001 fixing just compensation at P500.00 per sq m; YCLA objected and sought P900.00 per sq m citing improvements.
- The RTC directed YCLA to submit a written manifestation and allowed NPC to comment; trial on just compensation ensued.
- YCLA moved for an ocular inspection by the Board; the RTC granted the motion on July 25, 2003.
- The Board conducted an ocular inspection on August 27, 2003 and submitted a second Report dated September 15, 2003 fixing just compensation at P1,000.00 per sq m, citing prevailing market values in 2003 and the property’s strategic location.
- Trial court judgment
- On May 12, 2005, the RTC of Calapan City, Branch 40, rendered a Decision adopting the Board’s recommendation and ordered NPC to pay YCLA P5,786,000.00 representing the value of the expropriated lands and 26 molave trees, with legal interest from NPC’s actual possession on April 19, 1999 until full payment....(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Primary legal question presented
- Whether the RTC and the CA had sufficient factual and legal basis in arriving at the amount of just compensation awarded for the subject properties.
- Submissions of the parties
- NPC’s contentions:
- The Board of Commissioners Report dated September 15, 2003 lacked factual basis and documentary support.
- The P900.00 per sq m award is excessive given the properties' condition at the time NPC filed the expropriation complaint.
- The Court should adopt the P500.00 per sq m recommendation in the Board’s May 2, 2001 Report.
- YCLA’s contentions:
-
...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)