You are on page 1of 1


FACTS: petitioner is a government owned and controlled corporation for the development of
hydroelectric power, pursuant to RA 6395. In order to carry out its purpose, NPC is authorized to
exercise the power of eminent domain. On Feb.19, 1998, NPC filed a complaint for eminent domain with
the RTC of Iba, Zambales, seeking the acquisition of an easement of right-of-way and certain portions of
agricultural lands owned by Igmedio and Liwayway Chiong and the Heirs of Agrifina Angeles to be used
in its Northwestern Luzon Transmission Line Project. Respondents averred that the fair market value is
P1,100 /m. On Mar.9, 2000, Atty. Castillo and Ms.Ragadio submitted their report that the property have
a fair market value of P500/m. On May 5, 2000, Atty. Alog submitted his report recommending that
NPC pay an easement fee of P20,957.88 and P9,187.05 to heirs of Angeles and spouses Chiong,
respectively. Furthermore, Atty. Alog assessed the properties to have fair market value of P22.50/m for
Angeles and P15.75/m for Chiong.
ISSUE: whether or not NPC should be required to pay full market value as just compensation despite the
fact that the petitioner was only acquiring an easement of right-of-way
HELD: in eminent domain or expropriation proceedings, the general rule is that the just compensation to
which the owner is entitled to is the market value, which is the sum of money which a person desirous
but not compelled to buy, and an owner wiling but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a price to
be given and received therefor. When only a part of a property is expropriated, the owner is also
entitled to recover for the consequential damage, if any, to the remaining part of the property, from
which value of consequential benefits must be deducted. In fixing the valuation at P500/m, the CA
noted that the trial court had considered the reports of the commissioners and proofs submitted by the
parties. The trial court found that the land sought to be expropriated are agricultural land with minimal
improvements. It is the nature and character of the land at the time of the taking that is the principal
criterion to determine just compensation to the landowner. Without any showing that the valuation is
exorbitant or otherwise unjustified, factual finding of the CA is binding on the parties. The petition is
denied for lack of merit. CAs decision is affirmed.