TAGUINOD v.

DALUPANG
G.R. NO. 166883, November 23, 2005.

FACTS:

On October 16, 1987, R.A. No. 274, which allowed subdivision of military
reservations belonging to the Republic of the Philippines subject to certain conditions,
and R.A. No. 730, which permitted sale of the said properties for residential purposes
without public auction, were promulgated. Respondent Maximino Dalupang and
petitioner Angela Taguinod filed sales application for Lot 11 located at Block 131, Signal
Village, Taguig. This block is a 570 square meter land consisted of Lot 11 and Lot 6.
Petitioner filed a protest to Land Management Sector of Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (DENR) claiming that she was the actual owner of the lot and the
respondent was just her caretaker. Son of the petitioner filed a separate application for
Lot 6.

Upon investigation, it was confirmed that the petitioner was the owner of the
concrete house in the middle of Lot 6 and Lot 11 with Tax Declaration under the name
of Ret. Capt. Eusebio Taguinod. In 1975, they allowed their townmate and victim of a
fire incident in Parañaque, the respondent, to build a small house in the lot. She also
contended that the respondent cannot be granted with the sales application because he
was already a recipient of National Housing Authority (NHA) in Sapang Palay
Resettlement Program in San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan. Barangay Captain Binag of
Brgy. Signal Village attested to petitioner’s ownership of the aforementioned house and
lot.

DENR Regional Director declared that Lot 6 was occupied by the respondent
while Lot 11 by the petitioner. Both appealed to the Office of the DENR Secretary and
while this was pending, the petitioner’s application for Lot 11 was approved. Eventually,
the division made by the Regional Director was affirmed by the Secretary. However,
petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration prompted the reversal of DENR Secretary’s prior
decision, thus disqualifying the respondent due to the NHA award and declaring
petitioner’s son for Lot 6. In an appeal to the Office of the President (OP), the
respondent was favored. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the decision of OP.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the respondent is qualified for sales application of Lot 6

RULING:

Yes. The respondent is qualified under Memorandum Order (MO) No. 119 which
provided guidelines in evaluating the application to purchase the land. Being an
awardee of NHA before did not disqualify him from being awarded of other government
lot especially when he already transferred the previously awarded lot to his nephew.
This cannot be faulted since the land investigators affirmed the allotment of Lot 6 to the
respondent and Lot 11 for the petitioner. The petition is denied. The Court affirmed the
decision of OP and CA.

STATUTORY PRINCIPLE:

Spirit and purpose of the law is applied. The law is construed in its spirit and
reason which is to give opportunity to the occupants to own their lands. MO No. 119
should be interpreted in consistency with the objective of R.A. No. 730.