Title
National Power Corp. vs. Heirs of Sangkay
Case
G.R. No. 165828
Decision Date
Aug 24, 2011
NPC constructed an underground tunnel on heirs' land without consent, diminishing its value. SC upheld just compensation, ruling the claim did not prescribe and NPC's actions constituted a taking.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 165828)

Petitioner

National Power Corporation

Respondents

Heirs of Macabangkit (all surnamed Macabangkit)

Key Dates

– 1970s: NPC constructs Agus River hydroelectric tunnels
– 1979: Alleged surreptitious completion of one underground tunnel
– November 21, 1997: Complaint filed for damages and just compensation
– August 13 & 18, 1999: RTC decisions and supplemental decision awarding compensation
– October 5, 2004: CA affirms RTC decision
– August 24, 2011: Supreme Court decision

Applicable Law

– 1987 Philippine Constitution, Article III, Section 9 (private property, just compensation)
– Republic Act No. 6395, Sections 3(f), 3(h), 3(i) (NPC powers, right of way, compensation, prescriptive period)
– Civil Code provisions on easements (Arts. 620, 634, 646), prescription, and obligations (Art. 19)

Factual Background

NPC diverted Agus River waters through underground tunnels to feed hydroelectric plants. In 1995 the Heirs discovered that one tunnel ran beneath their Iligan City land. Attempts to sell or develop the property failed due to safety and structural concerns. They alleged NPC constructed and concealed this tunnel in bad faith, impairing the land’s use and value, and filed suit in 1997 seeking recovery of the property, damages, or alternatively just compensation. NPC counterclaimed that only an easement existed under RA 6395, barred by prescription.

Issues

1. Did NPC’s underground tunnel actually traverse and affect the respondents’ land?
2. Was the respondents’ action for just compensation barred by the five-year prescriptive period in Section 3(i) of RA 6395 or by Civil Code prescription?

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

– Ocular inspection confirmed a subterranean tunnel; uprooted trees evidenced disturbance.
– NPC acted in bad faith by concealing the tunnel since 1979.
– Ordered NPC to pay P500/sqm (total P113,532,500) as just compensation plus interest; monthly rentals of P30,000 from 1979 to 1999; moral and exemplary damages of P200,000 each; and 15% of the award as attorney’s fees.
– Supplemental decision condemned the land in favor of NPC upon payment.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

– Affirmed factual findings on the tunnel’s existence based on eyewitness testimony, topographic survey, sketch map, and the ocular inspection.
– Held that Section 3(i) applies only to surface works readily discoverable and not to secret subterranean tunnels.
– Rejecting prescription defenses, affirmed all RTC awards.

Ruling of the Supreme Court

1. Factual Findings Binding
  RTC’s and CA’s factual findings on the tunnel are conclusive in a certiorari review. NPC failed to rebut credible evidence (engineer testimony, maps, inspection).

2. Non-Applicability of RA 6395’s Five-Year Prescription
  Section 3(i)’s prescriptive period covers actions for damages, not inverse condemnation suits for just compensation. Constitutional protection cannot be cut off by statutory prescription.

3. Nature of the Taking and Just Compensation
  NPC’s surreptitious tunnel constituted a taking of the land’s beneficial use. Inverse condemnation principles apply: just compensation equals the landowner’s loss, measured by fair market value at the time the complaint was filed. NPC should have initiated formal expropriation or paid compensation upfront.

4. Modifications to Awards
  – Interest at 12% per annum on the principal P113,532,500 from November 21, 1997 until full payme





...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.