FACTS:
The plaintiff (petitioner municipality herein) is
the owner of a parcel of residential land located at Poblacion, Dumingag,
Zamboanga del Sur with an area of 5,894 square meters more or less; that the
parcel of land was reserved for public plaza under Presidential Proclamation
No. 365 dated March 15, 1968; that during the incumbency of the late Mayor
Isidoro E. Real, Sr. or in 1958, the municipality leased an Area of 1,350
square meters to the defendants (respondents herein) subject to the condition
that they should vacate the place in case it is needed for public purposes;
that the defendants religiously paid the rentals until 1967; that thereafter,
the defendants refused to pay the rentals; that the incumbent mayor discovered
that the defendants filed a "Cadastral Answer" over said lot; that
the defendants refused to vacate the place despite efforts of the municipality;
that the national government had alloted an appropriation for the construction
of a municipal gymnasium within the public plaza but the said construction
which was already started could not continue because of the presence of the
buildings constructed by the defendants; that the appropriation for the
construction of the gymnasium might be reverted back to the national government
which would result to "irreparable damage, injury and prejudice" to
the municipality and its people who are expected to derive benefit from the
accomplishment of the project.
The trial court granted the petitioner
municipality's motion for a writ of possession "with the ancillary writ of
demolition to place in possession the plaintiff on the land subject of this
case, to the end that the public construction thereon will not be
jeopardized."
ISSUE:
(1) Whether or not the issuance of the writ of
possession and ancillary writ of demolition was proper; and (2) Whether or not
the buildings constructed by the respondents are nuisance.
DECISION:
The issuance of the writ of possession and
ancillary writ of demolition was improper because an administrative case on the
ownership of the land to which the respondent is a party-in-interest is still
pending. Thus, should the respondent be declared the rightful owner of the
land, the demolition shall be prejudicial to his interest.
The buildings constructed by the respondents shall
be considered a nuisance should the pending administrative case declare that
the subject land is part of public dominion. The Civil Code provides under Art.
694 that “A nuisance is any act, omission, establishment, business, condition
of property or anything else which... (5) Hinders or impairs the use of
property." Thus, if the administrative case is decided against the
respondent, his continued use of the buildings hinders or impairs the use of
the property by the municipality making such building a nuisance.
No comments:
Post a Comment