Title
Spouses Mejorada vs. Vertudazo
Case
G.R. No. 151797
Decision Date
Oct 11, 2007
The court granted the respondents an easement of right of way over the petitioners' property, affirming compliance with the Civil Code requirements.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 112497)

Facts:

  • The case involves Spouses Manuel Mejorada and Rosalinda P. Mejorada as petitioners against Glorificacion Vertudazo, Sol Vertudazo, and other respondents.
  • In 1981, respondents established residence on a 300-square meter landlocked lot in Telaje, Tandag, Surigao del Sur, relying on a proposed undeveloped barangay road for access.
  • In 1988, petitioners purchased a 646-square meter lot from Rosario QuiAones, which included a 55.5 square meter access route to QuiAones Street.
  • The access area was used by respondents and the public for years until July 2, 1997, when petitioners obstructed it by constructing a garage.
  • Respondents sought resolution through the barangay, but no settlement was reached, leading them to file a complaint in the Regional Trial Court for an easement of right of way and a preliminary mandatory injunction.
  • Petitioners claimed an alternate, albeit longer, route existed and argued that respondents had not offered compensation for the right of way.
  • The trial court initially ordered the passageway to be opened during the day, which petitioners agreed to but later failed to comply.
  • Respondents filed motions for contempt and to revive their application for injunction.
  • The trial court granted a permanent injunction, allowing respondents access through petitioners' property, a decision later affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the respondents, affirming the decisions of the Court of Appeals and the trial court, thereby granting the respondents the...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Court's decision was based on the Civil Code provisions regarding easements, defining an easement as an encumbrance on immovable property for the benefit of another immovable belonging to a different owner.
  • Respondents' property was identified as the dominant estate, while petitioners' property was the servient estate.
  • The Court noted that respondents met the four requisites for claiming a legal or compulsory right of way:
    1. Their property was surrounded by other immo...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.