Case Digest (G.R. No. 136438)
Facts:
In Teofilo C. Villarico v. Vivencio Sarmiento, et al. (G.R. No. 136438, November 11, 2004), petitioner Teofilo C. Villarico owned a 66-square-meter lot in La Huerta, Parañaque City, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (T.C.T.) No. 95453. A raised Ninoy Aquino Avenue separated his lot from the highway by a strip of public land on which the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) erected stairways for pedestrian access. In 1991, respondents Vivencio Sarmiento, spouses Bessie Sarmiento-Del Mundo and Beth Del Mundo, Andokas Litson Corporation, and Maritesa Carinderia constructed commercial structures on that public strip. In 1993, Villarico acquired by Deed of Exchange a 74.30-square-meter portion of the same strip from the government, registered as T.C.T. No. 74430. In 1995, he filed an accion publiciana in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Parañaque City, Branch 259 (Civil Case No. 95-044), alleging that respondents had deprived him of his right-of-way to Ninoy AquinoCase Digest (G.R. No. 136438)
Facts:
- Ownership and location of petitioner’s lot
- Teofilo C. Villarico is registered owner of a 66 sqm lot in La Huerta, Parañaque City under T.C.T. No. 95453.
- The lot is separated from Ninoy Aquino Avenue by a government-owned, 4 m-elevated strip equipped with public stairways by the DPWH.
- Respondents’ construction and occupation
- In 1991, Vivencio Sarmiento with spouses Bessie Sarmiento-Del Mundo and Beth Del Mundo erected a building on the public strip.
- Later that year, Andokas Litson Corporation and Maritesa Carinderia occupied part of the same structure.
- Petitioner’s acquisition of portion of public land
- In 1993, Villarico executed a Deed of Exchange for a 74.30 sqm portion of the government land.
- The parcel was registered in his name as T.C.T. No. 74430 in Parañaque.
- Trial court proceedings
- In 1995, petitioner filed an accion publiciana (Civ. Case No. 95-044) claiming respondents closed his right of way to the highway and encroached upon T.C.T. No. 74430.
- Respondents answered that they held valid city permits, that the land is government property, and denied any proprietary right in petitioner.
- RTC Decision (Nov. 14, 1996)
- Declared respondents have better possession of the public strip except the area covered by T.C.T. No. 74430.
- Ordered respondents to vacate the portion under T.C.T. No. 74430, dismissed petitioner’s damages and attorney’s fees claims.
- Court of Appeals Decision (Dec. 7, 1998)
- Affirmed the RTC in toto and imposed costs against petitioner.
Issues:
- Whether the CA’s factual findings are unsupported by specific evidence.
- Whether the only issue is petitioner’s acquisition of a right of way over government land.
- Whether accion publiciana is the proper remedy to enforce a right of way on public dominion property.
- Whether a right of way carries with it a right of possession enforceable against respondents.
- Who holds the better right of possession over the disputed land.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)