FACTS: NAPOCOR
instituted expropriation proceedings over parcels of land in Brgy. Maginhawa,
Bato, Catanduanes for a right-of-way easement, construction and maintenance of
its Substation Island Grid Project.
NAPOCOR offered a price of P500.00 per square meter.
However, respondents (property owners) objected and alleged that the value of
properties was P2000.00 per square meter.
On Dec. 16, 2002 RTC of Virac, Catanduanes confirmed the
NAPOCOR’s right to expropriate and ordered the creation of a commission to
determine the amount of just compensation to be paid to respondents.
On Jan. 28, 2003 NAPOCOR filed a Notice to Take Possession
on the basis of Rule 67 Rules of Court alleging its entitlement thereof in view
of its deposit with Land Bank of the Philippines in the amount of P 3280.00 on
the provisional value of the properties.
On July 10, 2003 the court appointed commissioners
recommended a fair market value of P1500.00 per square meter based on their
research and proper considerations on the present market value of properties,
location, and surrounding properties in the area.
NAPOCOR opposed the recommendation of the commissioners
arguing, inter alia, that:
a) the
opinions given by people who live in the area must not be given weight due to
their lack of real estate expertise;
b) The
Provincial Appraisal Committee valued said lot at P500.00 per square
meter;
c) The
approved zonal values of real properties in Catanduanes classified as Residential
Regular (RR) is P105.00 per square meter.
d) Only
an easement of right-of-way shall be acquired over the properties of the
defendants which remain classified as cocoland and as provided in RA 6395 (NPC
Charter), shall not exceed 10% of the market value declared by the owner or
administrator or anyone having legal interest in the property, or as determined
by the assessor, whichever is lower.
NAPOCOR amended its complaint stating that it need the
properties to construct the Substation Island Grid Project instead of just an
easement of right of way and made a deposit with Land Bank in the amount of
P580, 769.93 alleging that this represented the value of 3,954 square meters
sought to be expropriated. NAPOCOR then filed an Urgent Ex Parte Motion for the
issuance of a Writ of Possession which was granted by the RTC.
Upon the granted motion of time extension to remove the
properties of the respondents, the trial court fixed the value of the
structures and improvements on the land to P827, 000.00 and ordered NAPOCOR to
deposit the additional amount of P262, 639.17 which it failed to deposit to
which the trial court resolves by CANCELING the Writ of Possession.
The appeal made by NAPOCOR was denied by the CA.
In a turn of events, NAPOCOR stated that it no longer
needed the properties as it was set to acquire an alternative site and filed a
Motion to Withdraw Appeal praying for withdrawal of its appeal for its Amended
Complaint to be dismissed.
ISSUES: Whether
or not the trial court erred:
1. On
relying on the commissioners on the valuation of improvements and/or
structures; and
2. In
recalling the Writ of Possession
HELD: SC held
that the trial court committed two errors.
1.
First, it should have based the value of the
improvements on the property on the determination made by NAPOCOR and not its
commissioners as required by Section 7 and 10 of RA 8974:
Section
7 Valuation of Improvements and/or Structures.--The Department of Public Works
and Highways and othr implementing agencies concerned, in coordination with the
local government units concerned in the acquisition of right-of-way, site or
location for any national government infrastructure project, are herby mandated
to adopt within sixty (60) days upon approval of this Act, the necessary
implementing rules and regulations for the equitable valuation of the
improvements and/or structures on the land to be expropriated.
Section
10 Pursuant to Section 7 of the Act, the Implementing agency shall determine
the valuation of the improvements and/or structures on the land to be acquired
using the replacement cost method. xxx
According to the law, it is the implementing agency, not
the commissioners, that determines the proffered value of improvements and
structures. A Writ of Possession may be issued once there is confirmation by
the trial court of the proffered value.
2.
The second error of the trial court occurred when it
issued a Writ of Possession on the basis of NAPOCOR’s deposit of the alleged
provisional value with Land Bank, not on its actual payment to respondents.
Even if the deposit of P580, 769.93 was the correct provisional value, it
cannot be considered as compliance with Section 4 of RA 8974 which plainly requires
direct payment to the property owner, not a mere deposit with the authorized
government depositary. Without such direct payment, no writ of possession may
be obtained, which, NAPOCOR failed to do.
Comments
Post a Comment