Case Digest (G.R. No. 126102)
Facts:
Ortigas & Co. Ltd. v. Court of Appeals and Ismael G. Mathay III, G.R. No. 126102, December 04, 2000, the Supreme Court Second Division, Quisumbing, J., writing for the Court.In August 25, 1976, petitioner Ortigas & Company sold to Emilia Hermoso a lot in Greenhills Subdivision (Lot 1, Block 21, Psd-66759; TCT No. 0737) under a deed of sale that contained express restrictive covenants: the lot was to be used exclusively for residential purposes; only one single-family residential building could be erected; rooftop signs or billboards for advertising were prohibited; and building plans required the seller’s approval. Those restrictions were duly annotated on the Torrens title and expressly stated to run with the land until December 31, 2025.
In 1981, the Metropolitan Manila Commission enacted MMC Ordinance No. 81-01, a comprehensive zoning ordinance that reclassified a portion of Ortigas Avenue in Greenhills (the stretch from Madison to Roosevelt) as commercial. In June 1984 private respondent Ismael G. Mathay III leased the lot from the Hermosos (and/or their corporation) and constructed a single-story commercial building for Greenhills Autohaus, Inc. The lease did not specify permitted uses.
On January 18, 1995, Ortigas filed Civil Case No. 64931 in the Regional Trial Court, Pasig, Branch 261, seeking demolition of the commercial structure for breach of the deed restrictions and prayed for injunctive relief. The complaint was later amended to implead Mathay III and J.P. Hermoso Realty Corp. as defendants. The trial court issued a writ of preliminary injunction on June 16, 1995; a motion to set it aside by Mathay was denied.
Mathay filed a special civil action for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 39193), alleging grave abuse of discretion by the RTC because MMC Ordinance No. 81-01 reclassified the lot and should govern. The Court of Appeals granted the petition on March 25, 1996 and nullified the injunction; it denied Ortigas’s motion for reconsideration on August 13, 1996. Ortigas then elevated the case to the Su...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals correctly hold that the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the writ of preliminary injunction because MMC Ordinance No. 81-01 nullified the deed restriction limiting the lot to residential use?
- Does private respondent Ismael G. Mathay III, as lessee, have legal capacity or locus standi to challenge and seek dissolution of the injunct...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)