This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
RALPH FRANCIS PALMA RAYMOND VALLEJO RENARD ROBERT MASONGSONG CIRUS JANSEN JACELA JAIRUS RUBIO
SUBMITTED TO: ATTY. JOSE ANTONIO ALILING
Rule 66 – Quo Warranto What is Quo Warranto? (1) Quo warranto is a demand made by the state upon some individual or corporation to show by what right they exercise some franchise or privilege appertaining to the state which, according to the Constitution and laws they cannot legally exercise by virtue of a grant and authority from the State.1 (2) It is a special civil action commenced by a verified petition against (a) a person who usurps a public office, position or franchise; (b) a public officer who performs an act constituting forfeiture of a public office; or (c) an association which acts as a corporation within the Philippines without being legally incorporated or without lawful authority to do so.2
Distinguish from Quo Warranto in the Omnibus Election Code Quo Warranto (Rule 66) Quo Warranto (Election Code) Subject of the petition is in relation to an Subject of the petition is in relation to an appointive office; elective office; The issue is the legality of the occupancy Grounds relied upon are: (a) ineligibility to of the office by virtue of a legal the position; or (b) disloyalty to the appointment; Republic. Petition is brought either to the Supreme May be instituted with the COMELEC by any Court, the Court of Appeals or the Regional voter contesting the election of any Trial Court; member of Congress, regional, provincial or city officer; or to the MeTC, MTC or MCTC if against any barangay official; Filed within one (1) year from the time the Filed within ten (10) days after the cause of ouster, or the right of the proclamation of the results of the election; petitioner to hold the office or position arose; Petitioner is the person entitled to the Petitioner may be any voter even if he is office; not entitled to the office; The court has to declare who the person When the tribunal declares the candidateentitled to the office is if he is the elect as ineligible, he will be unseated but petitioner. the person occupying the second place will not be declared as the one duly elected because the law shall consider only the person who, having duly filed his certificate of candidacy, received a plurality of votes.
44 Am. Jur. 88-89 Section 1, Rule 66
Bacal. Judgment in Quo Warranto action 3 4 5 6 7 Sec. constitutes a ground for the forfeiture of his office. 7. Accordingly. 6 In bringing a petition for quo warranto. the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court. by a public prosecutor. (c) An association which acts a corporation within the Philippines without being legally incorporated or without lawful authority so to act. position or franchise may be commenced by a verified petition brought in the name of the Republic of the Philippines thru the Solicitor General against: (a) A person who usurps. Rule 66 Sec. 2. by the provision of law.7 It is not enough that he merely asserts the right to be appointed to the office. 5). Id. or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office. 226& Cui vs. 1. Gimenez. the private person may maintain the action without the intervention of the Solicitor General and without need for any leave of court. Cui. position or franchise. he must show that he has a clear right to the office allegedly being held by another.3 When the action is commenced by the Solicitor General. the petition may be brought in the Regional Trial Court of the City of Manila. Id. Navarro vs.3 When government commence an action against individuals (1) Quo warranto is commenced by a verified petition brought in the name of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines by the Solicitor General. 37 Cuevas vs. intrudes into. (b) A public officer who does or suffers an act which. or in some instances. 5 When individual may commence an action (1) The petition may be commenced by a private person in his own name where he claims to be entitled to the public office or position alleged to have been usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by another (Sec. 60 Phil. 347 SCRA 338 . 10 Phil. Sec. 4 (2) An action for the usurpation of a public office.
the separate interest of each defendant. Attorney-General. so far as practicable. as the case may be. or unlawfully holding or exercising a public office. Where the right of the plaintiff to expropriate is conferred by law. intruding into. and join as defendants all persons owning or claiming to own. It is the actual filing of the complaint for expropriation which binds the land. Eminent domain. 9). Expropriation by local government units has heretofore also been authorized by different laws. 50 Phil. v. — The right of eminent domain shall be exercised by the filing of a verified complaint which shall state with certainty the right and purpose of expropriation. v. 832) 4. he may sue for damages against the alleged usurper within one (1) year from the entry of judgment establishing his right to the office in question (Sec. position or franchise of the parties to the action as justice requires (Sec. Presently. and that the petitioner or relator. 523). despite the filing of the action. position or franchise. or if the title is otherwise obscure or doubtful so that the plaintiff cannot with accuracy or certainty specify who are the real owners. or occupying.4 (1) When the respondent is found guilty of usurping.A. judgment shall be rendered that such respondent be ousted and altogether excluded therefrom. averment to that effect shall be made in the complaint. But the defendant land owners in each province may require a separate action to be commenced against them in their respective provinces to avoid inconvenience and expense (MRR Co. This section requires that the complaint should allege both the right and the purpose of the expropriation. Rule 67 primarily governs the exercise of the right of eminent domain by the State acting through the national government. is the right of the State to acquire private property for public use upon the payment of just compensation. 107 Phil. 3. although occupied by private individuals. 461). Proceedings for the expropriationor condemnation of parcels of land situated in different provinces may be brought in any of said provinces. Baylosis. the owner of the land may still dispose of said property. . 2. (Republic v. RULE 67 Expropriation Section 1. Jr. however. However. 20 Phil. Such further judgment may be rendered determining the respective rights in and to the public office. That right extends to private property partly or entirely personal and the process of acquisition is substantially the same (see Act 204). showing. (MRR Co. and not a mere notice of the intent to expropriate. together with other political subdivisions created and so empowered by law. De Asis. which is properly a concept of political or constitutional law. any part thereof or interest therein. Rights of a person adjudged entitled to public office (1) If the petitioner is adjudged to be entitled to the office. 96 Phil. describe the real or personal property sought to be expropriated. (1a) NOTES 1. recover his costs. the complaint does not have to state with certainty the right of expropriation. 7160). Mitchel. The complaint. v. such provisions on this power of local political subdivisions have been consolidated and embodied in the Local Government Code of 1991 (R. If the title to any property sought to be expropriated appears to be in the Republic of the Philippines. 11). as the grantee would merely be substituted in hisplace and holds the land subject to the results of the action (Tuason. 131) 5.
suffices for immediate entry on the land (Haguisan v. et al. May 19. This section now provides for the amount of the preliminary deposit. and the issuance of that writ becomes ministerial on the part of the trial court (Biglang-awa.e. 19. the Government questioned the applicability of R. L-40108. Tayengco. v. et al.R. . it could always wait until the order of expropriation is issued before it enters upon the land. It was the Government’s contention that the expropriation action should be governed by Rule 67.5 Section 2. without prior hearing. L-23766.R. 1966. 1967). 166429. the plaintiff shall have the right to take or enter upon the possession of the real property involved if he deposits with the authorized government depositary an amount equivalent to the assessed value of the property for purposes of taxation to be held by such bank subject to the orders of the court. Dec. as amended. 139927-36. The preliminary deposit is only necessary if the plaintiff desires entry on the land upon its institution of the action. (2a) NOTES 1.31. Republic. On November 7. 5. These proects refer to all national government ingrastructure. all projects under R. engineering works and service contrats.. April 29. no. In Republic. This building was constructed by defendant PIATCO (Philippine International Air Terminals Co. in this particular case. Discrete guidelines for expropriation requirements and procedure under this law are provided. 6. and followed by the judge presiding over the expropriation court. etc. 7. as amended (the Build-Operate-and Transfer Law). 40 Phil.) in the NAIA complex as national infrastructure project under R. Inc. etc. Such deposit shall be in money. mere notice to the landowner. R. After such deposit is made the court shall order the sheriff or other proper officer to forthwith place the plaintiff in possession of the property involved and promptly submit a report thereof to the court with service of copies to the parties. L-31032. unless in lieu thereof the court authorizes the deposit of a certificate of deposit of a government bank of the Republic of the Philippines payable on demand to the authorized government depositary. Congress enacted R. et al. i.A. the assessed value of the property for purposes of taxation. 2000. Also. its value shall be provisionally ascertained and the amount to be deposited shall be promptly fixed by the court. site or location for national government infrastructure projects. Emilia. otherwise.. et al.550) 3. L-21593.. Gingoyon. The preliminary deposit under this section constitutes advance payment in the event the expropriation proceds.Republic v. 1984) 2.A. If personal property is involved. G. a special law to facilitate the acquisition of right-of-way. including projects undertaken by government-owned and controlled corporation. 6957. Entry of plaintiff upon depositing value with authorized government depositary.22. the Supreme Court upheld the Regional Trial Court’s position that. Nos. the expropriator is entitled to a writ of possession over the property as a matter of right. 8974. — Upon the filing of the complaint or at any time thereafter and after due notice to the defendant. 6957. 2005). et al. Camus. Bacalla. 8974 in the expropriation proceedings it had instituted over the airport facility called NAIA 3 (Ninoy Aquino International Airport Passenger Terminal 3). 8974 had superseded Rule 67. Aug..A. and stands as indemnity for damages should the proceedings not succeed (Visayas Refining Co. v. 4.. Once the required deposit under this section has been duly made. (G. 2000).A. and other related and necessary activities regardless of the source of funding. 1966. v.A. Owners of expropriated lands are entitled to legal interest on the compensation eventually adjudged from the date the condemnor takes possession of the land until the full compensation is paid to them or deposited in court (Digran v. Auditor General. April 29.. with rules and regulations for their implementation as prepared by a committee contemplated therein. Nov. Valdehueza v. On review by certiorari.
Defenses and objections. the deposit in favor of the landowner in the expropriation account. Holy Trinity Realty Development Corp. If a defendant has any objection to the filing of or the allegations in the complaint. 8974 specifically governs expropriation for national government infrastructure projects. 8974 is to supersede the system of deposit under Rule 67 with the scheme of “immediate payment” in cases involving national government infrastructure projects. whereas Rule 67 prescribes that the initial deposit be merely equivalent to the assessed value of the property for purposes of taxation. the plain intent of R.A. etc. he may file and serve a notice of appearance and a manifestation to that effect. Further. v. No. It contemplates land. the Government is required to make an immediate direct payment to the property owner upon the filing of the complaint to be entitled to a writ of possession.A. The Court explained that the term “site” does not of itself necessarily mean a piece of land fixed by definite boundaries. while Sec. if expropriation in engaged in by the National Government for purposes other that national infrastructure projects. and adduce all his objections and defenses to the taking of his property. whereas in Rule 67. the market value of the property as stated in the tax declaration or the relevant zonal valuation. buildings. in the interest of justice.19 of the Local Government Code governs the exercise of the power of eminent domain by local government units through an enabling ordinance. 2008). A defendant waives all defenses and objections not so alleged but the court. or if no such valuation is immediately available. — If a defendant has no objection or defense to the action or the taking of his property. Where the amount deposited pertains to separate properties of different landowner which were expropriated in the same proceeding. 8. Section 3. Thereafter.A 8974. Nonetheless. the landowner is entitled to the same. The holding in Gingoyon were replicated and ramified in Republic. 8974 provides. roads and all kinds of constructions adhered to the soil.” “site or location” of a national government infrastructure project within the coverage of R. that is. The answer shall specifically designate or identify the property in which he claims to have an interest. However. it recognizes the continued applicability of Rule 67 on procedural aspects. at the trial of the issue of just compensation whether or not a defendant has previously appeared or . the proffered value of the property.R. he shall be entitled to notice of all proceedings affecting the same. April 14. since it constitutes the civil fruits or accessions of the principal object. The appropriate standard of just compensation is a substantive matter well within the province of the legislature to fix. (G. 8974. Also. state the nature and extent of the interest claimed. then each landowner is entitled to the proportionate interest on the deposited amount pertaining to his own property and its commentsurate value. the Government has only to make an initial deposit with an authorized government depositary. specifically designating or identifying the property in which he claims to be interested. within the time stated in the summons. the value of the improvements under the replacement cost method. Under R. may permit amendments to the answer to be made not later than ten (10) days from the filing thereof. R. No counterclaim.6 Primarily. Such payment is based on the zonal valuation of the land. The Government theorizes that the NAIA 3 facilities cannot be deemed as the “right of way. the Supreme Court noted two crucial differences in the respective procedures involved under the statute and the Rule. If the amount deposited under either procedure bears interests. as a standard for initial compensation.A. cross-claim or third-party complaint shall be alleged or allowed in the answer or any subsequent pleading. he shall serve his answer within the time stated in the summons. 172410.A. The Court reiterated that the expropriation procedure under R. the assessed value standard and the deposit mode prescribed in Rule 67 continues to apply. The classifies the NAIA 3 facilities as real properties just like the soil on which they stand. As borne out by the deliberations in Congress. or any objection or defense to the taking of his property.
— If the objections to and the defenses against the right of the plaintiff to expropriate the property are overruled. however. The order of expropriation forecloses any further objections to the right to expropriate. the court may issue an order of expropriation declaring that the plaintiff has a lawful right to take the property sought to be expropriated. (n) Section 4. Order of expropriation. Aug. or when no party appears to defend as required by this Rule. and he may share in the distribution of the award. No.4.R. Teodoro. (National Power Corp. he may present evidence as to the amount of the compensation to be paid for his property. G. and shall be resolved within thirty (30) days after all the commissioners shall have received copies of the objections. 2. 18. shall not prevent the court from determining the just compensation to be paid. The word “just” is used to convey the idea that the equivalent to be rendered for the property to be taken shall be real. Such appeal. The special civil action of expropriation is. the Supreme Court has defined just compensation as the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator. as a consequence of the foregoing provisions of Sec. upon the payment of just compensation to be determined as of the date of the taking of the property or the filing of the complaint. Manubay AgroIndustrial Dev. whichever came first. The just compensation for the condemned property is generally the market value. the court shall appoint not more than three (3) competent and disinterested persons as commissioners to ascertain and report to the court the just compensation for the property sought to be taken. v. A final order sustaining the right to expropriate the property may be appealed by any party aggrieved thereby. — Upon the rendition of the order of expropriation. The significance of this fact is that. including the public purpose of the same. full and ample. After the rendition of such an order. Being determinative of the question of the right to expropriate. for the public use or purpose described in the complaint. The only substantial issue thereafter is the matter of just compensation.7 answered. on wherein multiple appeals are permitted. (4a) NOTES 1. The measure is not the taker’s gain but the owner’s loss. just as in special proceedings. 2004) . Copies of the order shall be served on the parties.. 150936. the plaintiff shall not be permitted to dismiss or discontinue the proceeding except on such terms as the court deems just and equitable. these values may serve as factors to be considered in the judicial valuation of the property. substantial. However. Objections to the appointment of any of the commissioners shall be filed with the court within ten (10) days from service. such order of condemnation is a final order on that issue and is appealable (see Uriarte v. 10 and 11). As a general proposition. The order of appointment shall designate the time and place of the first session of the hearing to be held by the commissioners and specify the time within which their report shall be submitted to the court. thereafter. 86 Phil. Ascertainment of compensation. An appeal may be taken from the aforesaid order authorizing expropriation and. Section 5. Corp. Such amount is not limited to he assessed value of the property or the schedule of market values determined by the provincial or city appraisal committee. the reglementary period to appeal shall be 30 days and a record on appeal shall be required for each of the permissible appeals. another appeal lies against the judgment on the just compensation to be paid (see Secs. (5a) NOTES 1. 196) 3.
which time may be extended in the discretion of the court. The general rule in arriving at such just compensation is the value of the property as of the date of its taking or the filing of the complaint (Sec. the operation of its franchise by the corporation or the carrying on of the business of the corporation or person taking the property. 3. The appointment of commissioners is one of the steps involved in expropriation proceedings. or there are conflicting claims to any part thereof. which oath shall be filed in court with the other proceedings in the case. (7a) Section 8. The commissioners shall make a full and accurate report to the court of all their proceedings. it may recommit the same to the commissioners for further report of facts. the clerk of the court shall serve copies thereof on all interested parties.8 2. Proceedings by commissioners.4) plus consequential . and may render judgment upon such partial report. accept the report and render judgment in accordance therewith. (6a) Section 7. argue the case. Report by commissioners and judgment thereupon. or retain it for the public use or purpose if entry has already been made. such report shall be filed within sixty (60) days from the date the commissioners were notified of their appointment. But in no case shall the consequential benefits assessed exceed the consequential damages assessed. for cause shown. or it may accept the report in part and reject it in part and it may make such order or render such judgment as shall secure to the plaintiff the property essential to the exercise of his right of expropriation. unless the parties consent to the contrary. and may from time to time so deal with such property. the commissioners shall take and subscribe an oath that they will faithfully perform their duties as commissioners. Except as otherwise expressly ordered by the court. (9a) NOTES 1. or the owner be deprived of the actual value of his property so taken. Upon the filing of such report. view and examine the property sought to be expropriated and its surroundings. — Before entering upon the performance of their duties. if they so desire. The commissioners shall assess the consequential damages to the property not taken and deduct from such consequential damages the consequential benefits to be derived by the owner from the public use or purpose of the property taken. the court may. Action upon commissioners' report. after hearing. But the judgment shall require the payment of the sum or sums awarded to either the defendant or the court before the plaintiff can enter upon the property. and the commissioners shall. — If the ownership of the property taken is uncertain. — Upon the expiration of the period of ten (10) days referred to in the preceding section. or even before the expiration of such period but after all the interested parties have filed their objections to the report or their statement of agreement therewith. The primary purpose of the proceedings by the commissioners is to determine the just compensation to be paid to the landowner. and to the defendant just compensation for the property so taken. — The court may order the commissioners to report when any particular portion of the real estate shall have been passed upon by them. Another instance where the appointment of commissioners is required is in judicial partition where the parties cannot agree (Sec. conflicting claims. Uncertain ownership. or it may set aside the report and appoint new commissioners. (8a) Section 9. by himself or counsel. to attend. Section 6. and direct the commissioners to proceed with their work as to subsequent portions of the property sought to be expropriated. Evidence may be introduced by either party before the commissioners who are authorized to administer oaths on hearings before them. after which either party may. This is different from trial by commissioners under Rule 32 wherein the appointment of commissioners is discretionary on the court and the power is exercised only under the circumstances enumerated therein. or. Rule 69). the court may order any sum or sums awarded as compensation for the property to be paid to the court for the benefit of the person adjudged in the same proceeding to be entitled thereto. and may measure the same. and such proceedings shall not be effectual until the court shall have accepted their report and rendered judgment in accordance with their recommendations. with notice that they are allowed ten (10) days within which to file objections to the findings of the report. after due notice to the parties.
cf. Furthermore. provided such assessed benefits do not exceed the assessed damages. Aug.6). all of which adopted and laid down the common formula that the basis of just compensation shall be the fair market declared by the owner of the property or the market value determined by the assessor. If the compensation is not paid when the property is taken.. et al. No. (G. L35861. 1983) was abandoned. 59603. the Supreme Court declare as invalid and unconditional P. The consequential benefits that shall be deducted refers to the actual benefits derived by the owner on he remaining portion of his land which are the direct and proximate results of the improvements consequent to the expropriation. (Sec. 1970). Oct. 170). June 29.. L-27006. et al. v. It held that said decrees constitute an impermissible encroachment on judicial prerogatives since the determination of just compensation is reserved for the courts by the Constitution. L30098. 3. 1987). and is bought by one under no necessity of having it” (Manila Railroad Co. aside from preventing such determination by commissioner. 1224. 1042[Unrep]) The judgment rendered. The value of the property means the “market value thereof. requiring the payment of the award determined as just compensation for the condemned property and as a condition precedent for the transfer of title to the Government. whichever is lower. et al. that is. Inc. et al. cannot be realized upon execution. Rights of plaintiff after judgment and payment. v. The nature and the value of the land at the time it was taken by the Government should be the basis of the price to be paid to the owner if the taking of possession thereof was made before the institution of the expropriation proceedings. The trial court has the jurisdiction to determine in the same expropriation proceedings. 326). — Upon payment by the plaintiff to the defendant of the compensation fixed by the judgment. v.9 damages minus consequential benefits. (10a) . 4. et al. Vda. 794. but is postponed to a later date. 1063. Mun. In Export Processing Zone Authority v. June 30. 2. 1259. 15. 18. 6. 96 Phil.R.R.( L-49439. CA. 1669 and 1670. 56378. or to retain it should he have taken immediate possession thereof under the provisions of section 2 hereof. 464. G.R. No. Section 10. 5. Caligsihan. et al..J. 110 Phil. the price which it will command where it is offered for sale by one who desires. 1986). The return to the former procedure outlined in Rule 67 was decreed and the doctrine in NHA v. Reublic. 76. the interest awarded is actually part of the just compensation which takes into account such delay (Benguet Consolidated. or decline to receive the amount tendered. et al. 1970). 262. June 22. 1984). the plaintiff shall have the right to enter upon the property expropriated and to appropriate it for the public use or purpose defined in the judgment. CA. as the legislature must first appropriate the amount over and above the provisional deposit. Reyes. while sentimental value is not considered (Republic v. If the defendant and his counsel absent themselves from the court. No. Said decrees would also constitute denial of due process and equal protection to the landowner who is denied the right to question the assessor’s determination. of daet v. 71412. the same shall be ordered to be deposited in court and such deposit shall have the same effect as actual payment thereof to the defendant or the person ultimately adjudged entitled thereto. (Comm. or after tender to him of the amount so fixed and payment of the costs. san Diego. The assessed value is only prima facie evidence of the actual value of the property if the assessment is based on the sworn statement of the owner (Republic v. but is not obliged to sell. CFI of Pampanga et al. The value at the time of the filing of the complaint is determinative if the taking of possession coincides with or is subsequent to the commencement of the proceedings. De Mortera.. v. republic v. Of Public Highways. conflicting claims of ownership over the property involved and to declare the lawful owner thereof (Republic v. with legal interest thereon from the taking of the possession of the property. 1979).. 18. G. Lara. and not the general benefits which he receives in common with the community (29 C. Dulay. with interest from its taking and with attorney’s fees to be determined by the trial court (National Power Corp.. 40 Phil.94 phil. April 29. Urtula. a judgment in expropriation proceeding should provide for the payment of legal interest a as matter of law from the time the Government takes over the land until it pays the owner thereof.S. Feb.D.
National Housing Authority. with the approval of the court first had. — The fees of the commissioners shall be taxed as a part of the costs of the proceedings.the judgment denying the right of expropriation is not res judicata on the issue of damages arising from such illegal expropriation (Republic v.R. 2003). the plaintiff must first pay to the landowner or deposit with the clerk of court the just compensation determined in the judgment. the particular property or interest therein expropriated. the landowner is entitled to interest computed from the time that the property is actually taken to the time when compensation is actually paid (Reyes. effect of reversal. Dec. title to the property remains in the owner until payment is actually made or deposited in court. (13a) Section 14. by an adequate description. shall be paid by the plaintiff. Costs. 776). No. matter. judgment shall be rendered ordering the Regional Trial Court to forthwith enforce the restoration to the defendant of the possession of the property. v. Entry not delayed by appeal. No. et al. 109 Phil 580). To argue for the return of their property would ignore the fact that their right against the expropriating authority is different from that of an unpaid seller in ordinary sales. G. to which the remedy of recission might perhaps apply. G. and its effect.14. Furthermore. in order that it can exercise such right of entry. Nevertheless while the prevailing doctrine is that the non-payment of just compensation does not entitle the landowner to recover possession of the expropriated lot. ( see Federated Realty Corp. 147511. Jan. De los Angeles. the right of entry can immediately be availed of by the plaintiff despite the pendency of any appeal that may be take from the judgment. the non-payment by the expropriating landowners to recover possession does not entitle the private landowners to recover possession of their expropriated lots. 55 Phil. and to determine the damages which the defendant sustained and may recover by reason of the possession taken by the plaintiff. although the right to expropriate and use the land taken is complete at the time of entry. 2005) 2. and the nature of the public use or purpose for which it is expropriated. 11. Recording judgment. (12a) Section 13. Being an in rem proceeding. 10. but. et al.10 Section 11. 127967. When real estate is expropriated. which such minor or person judicially declared to be incompetent could do in such proceedings if he were of age or competent. by whom paid. Where the expropriation judgment is final and executor.. Under Sec. such landowner has the option of proving the damages either in the same expropriation case or in a separate action instituted for that purpose (MWC v. (14a) NOTES 1. unless an appeal is taken by the owner of the property and the judgment is affirmed. except those of rival claimants litigating their claims. (11a) Section 12. in the event the judgment of expropriation is reversed by the appellate court and the case is remanded to the lower court with the mandate to determine the damages caused to the landowner. However. v.R. do and perform on behalf of his ward any act. condemnation acts against the property. Baylosis. or thing respecting the expropriation for public use or purpose of property belonging to such minor or person judicially declared to be incompetent. CA. But if the appellate court determines that plaintiff has no right of expropriation. in cases where the government failed to pay just compensation within 5 years from the finality of judgment in the expropriation pro- . All costs. — The right of the plaintiff to enter upon the property of the defendant and appropriate the same for public use or purpose shall not be delayed by an appeal from the judgment. and its effect shall be to vest in the plaintiff the title to the real estate so described for such public use or purpose. in which event the costs of the appeal shall be paid by the owner. — The guardian or guardian ad litem of a minor or of a person judicially declared to be incompetent may. under Sec. 3. a certified copy of such judgment shall be recorded in the registry of deeds of the place in which the property is situated. 4. — The judgment entered in expropriation proceedings shall state definitely. Power of guardian in such proceedings. 20.
. (G.19 of R. cannot prevail over R. Mar. or purpose.A. May 7. No. No. 6. Feb. G. Provided.19.R. CA. Provided. In The City of Cebu v. with the proper court of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value at the time of the taking of the property.R. et al. June 29. by avoiding under valuation against the former and overvaluation against the latter consequent to delay in the payment of the award. but also the payment thereof within reasonable time from its taking. Feb. the just compensation is to be ascertained as of the time of the filing of the complaint (National Power Corp. No. Where the institution of the action precedes entry into the property. G. 161656. 4. pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and pertinent laws. such as the specific purposes. Atienza.6 2007. To allow the taking of the landowner’s properties and to leave them empty-handed while Government withholds compensation is undoubtedly oppressive (Apo Fruits Corp. the Local Government Code (R. 142971.. et al. however. G. 164195. 150640. 2007) Just compensation is intended to be the full and fair equivalent of the property expropriated. v. That the local government may immediately take possession of the property upon the filing of the expropriation proceedings and upon making a deposit. No. To repeat. et al. which involved a complain for eminent domain filed by petitioner in 1993.22. That the power eminent domain may not be exercised unless a valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner and such offer was not accepted.R.” 7. 1. CA et al.2. exercise the power of eminent domain for public use. (G. and the ascertainment of compensation.R. The measure is not the taker’s gain but the owner’s loss. 1990) that the claimant could have availed of the remedy of mandamus to compel the enactment of the necessary appropriation ordinance and the disbursement of municipal funds therefor (Yujuico v. which provided that just compensation shall be determined at the time of the filing of the complain for expropriation. Without prompt payment. the Supreme Court ruled that the issue of just compensation therein shall be determined based on the fair market value at the time of the taking of the property.12. No. Here. The amount is to be ascertained as of the time of the taking which usually coincides with the commencement of the expropriation proceedings. 2007). Jr.A. Nos. or welfare for the benefit of the poor and the landless. further. Oct. Under such circumstances. the owner shall have the right to recover possession of his property. the initiation of proceeding. This is in consonance with the principle that the government cannot keep the property and dishonor the judgment (Republic v.R. It pointed out that Sec.Dedamo. Barangay Sindalan.A 7160. it has been held in Municipality of Makati v. 2002). 2005) 5. – A local government unit may. CA. v. et al. 164282. upon payment of just compensation.R. Lim. De la Cruz. Note the variance in certain particulars between the foregoing special provisions on local governments and those in Rule 67. the concept of just compensation embraces not only the correct determination of the amount to be paid to the owner of the land. 7160) now regulates expropriation by the local political subdivisions and provides as follows: “Sec. et al. As noted at the outset. No. 7160 which is a substantive law. etc. compensation cannot be considered “just” since the owner has been immediately deprived of his land while being made to wait for a long period before receiving the payment necessary to cope with his loss. Oct. v.. 2005).. through its chief executive and acting through an ordinance. pursuant to Sec.11 ceeding. 89888-99.. the preliminary deposit. The compensation must be fair not only to the owner but also to the taker. G. Rule 67. the expropriated property had been used as a school site for five year while no-payment was effected though legal maneuvers of the local government unit which expropriated the property. 156093. Eminent Domain. G.R. .
R.R. The limitation is found in the Bill of Right. 284 (2001). Garcia. 158563. (Municipality of Binan v. with the condition that when that purpose is ended or abandoned the property shall return to its former owner.R. The second phase consists of the determination of just compensation. 1989. of course. Brion. or the fair value of the property as between the one who receives and the one who desires to sell.) 2. ADDITIONAL CASES: 1. In Ato v. Dec. Art. . In Land Bank of the Philippines v.12 Parenthetically. 4 of said Rule now provides that the payment of just compensation is to be determined as of the date of the taking of the property or the filing of the complaint whichever came first. 168967. It has been repeatedly stressed by this Court that the true measure is not the take’s gain but the owner’s loss. Oct.9. June 30. Heirs of Guivelando. 22. this Court had occasion to state: Constitutionally. 292 SCRA 678) it was hell that the principle of res judicata does not strictly apply against the state in eminent domain because you cannot curtail an inherent power of the State. are applealable. or a determination that the property is to be acquired for a public purpose. if its is mentioned at all. (National Housing Authority v. it being equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator. Feb. substantial. LBP. In Municipaliy of Paranaque v. Either order will be a final order that may be appealed by the aggrieved party. V.III of the 1987 Constitution provides “No private property shall be taken for public use without just compensation”. (City of Iloilo v.Sec. 6. 180 SCRA 576). the Supreme Court was obviously referring to Rule 67 of the 1964 Rules of Court. As revised in 1997. when the purpose is terminated or abandoned the former owner reacquires the property so expropriated. EXPROPRIATION: Expropriation proceeding have two states. Realty Corp (July 20. it does not need at all to be embodied in the Constitution. 2010. JUST COMPENSATION. Hon. 69260.R No. it is solely for purposes of limiting what is otherwise an unlimited power. 402 Phil. (G. (Estate of Salud Jimenez v. June 27 2008. G. Under circumstances. 2005) it was held that if land is expropriated for a particular purpose. and Hijo Plantation.R. 3. 164195. Del Castillo. v. As discussed at length below. G. J. Orilla. RECKONING POINT FOR THE DETERMINATION OF JUST COMPENSATION: 5.) 4. Inc. “just compensation” is the sum equivalent to the market value of the property. 1988. 12. 271.12. it is a power the Stat cannot do without. Both orders. (Apo Fruits Corp. full and ample. It ends with an order fixing the amount to be paid to the landowner. Philippines Export Processing Zone. The first stage ends with an order of dismissal. the deposits might have been sufficient for purposes of the immediate taking of the landholdings but cannot be claimed as amounts that would excuse the LBP from the payment of interest on the unpaid balance of the compensation due. 157206. No. 452 SCRA 483 (2003). It is an inherent power of State as it is power necessary for the State’s existence. they were not enough to compensate the petitioners for the potential income the landholdings could have earned for them if no immediate taking had taken place. being final. No. The word “just” is used to modify the meaning of the word “compensation” to convey the idea that the equivalent to be given for the property to be taken shall be real.M. the State acted oppressively and was far from “just” in their position to deny the petitioner of the potential income that the immediate taking of thei properties entailed. Gopuco (G. J. broadly described as the price fixed by the seller in open market in the usual and ordinary course of legal action and competition. 556 SCRA 102) a valuation case under our agrarian reform law. Sec.A BASIC LIMITATION ON THE STAT’S POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN: Eminent domain is the power of the State to take private property for public use. 2010. then. G. As an inherent power. No. No. Thus. Lolita Contreras.
A. R. 8974 represents a significant change from previous expropriation laws such as Rule 67 or even Sec. 7. No. either by the exercise of eminent domain or by purchase. December 19. the former owner retains no right in the land. 166429. it shall render a judgment containing the following matters: . an authorized Government depositary or the proper court. Rule 67 now expressly mandates that any objection or defense to the taking of the property of a defendant must be set forth in an answer. (2) A mortgage contract may have a provision in which the mortgage is a security for past. No. the contract must be constituted on either immovables (real property) or inalienable real rights. or any reversion to the former owner.R. 3. File a complaint for expropriation sufficient in form and substance in the proper court and 2.A.13 If land has been acquired for public use in fee simple. 153974. Sec. the court finds that the matters set forth in the complaint are true. of Meycauayan (G. 19 of R. Rule 68 . No. the private owner does not receive compensation prior to the deprivation of property. unconditionally. In Beluso v.R. 136349. 464 SCRA 353).A. Alviar. which took effect on July 1. To be a real estate mortgage. without any impairment of the estate or title acquired. and the public use may be abandoned or the land may be devoted to a different use. of Panay Capiz (G.R. Under the new modality prescribed by R. 8. The Supreme Court ruled that mortgages given to secure future advancements are valid and legal contracts (Prudential Bank vs. 1997. 2005) held that R. No. August 7. the private owner sees immediate monetary recompense with the same degree of speed as the taking of his/her property. 19 of LGC. 2006) held that a Local Government unit cannot authorized an expropriation of private property through a mere resolution of the lawmaking body. 2008) held that before a LGU may enter into the possession of the property sought to be expropriated. 10. Gingoyon (G. present and future indebtedness. Mun. Sec. Judgment on foreclosure for payment or sale (1) If after the trial. 9. Deposit with the said court at least 15% of the property’s fair market value based on its current tax declaration. If constituted on movables. the Rule allowing a defendant in an expropriation case to file a mothio to dismiss in lieu of an answer was amended by the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. 7160 expressly require an ordinance for the purpose and a resolution that merely expresses the sentiment of the municipal council will not suffice. 2006) held that the motion to dismiss is not permitted in a complaint for expropriation. 2124. Significantly. In Republic v. January 23. it must1. March 24. In both cases. No. 1953.A. 170432. respectively. Mun. In Francia. Rule 67 and the LGC merely provided that the Government deposits the initial amounts antecedent to acquiring possession of the property with. CC). This principal obligation is a simple loan or mutuum described in Art.Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage (1) A real estate mortgage is an accessory contract executed by a debtor in favor of a creditor as security for the principal obligation. 8974 mandates immediate payment of the initial just compensation prior to the issuance of the writ of possession in favor of the Government.R. In Masikip v. City of Pasig (G. Jr. Civil Code. v. No. This clause known as a dragnet clause or blanket mortgage clause has its origins in American jurisprudence. The law does not make determination of a public purpose a condition precedent to the issuance of a writ of possession. the contract is a chattel mortgage (Art. 8974.
is subject to challenge by the aggrieved party by appeal or by other post-judgment remedies. (2) The judgment of the court on the above matters is considered a final adjudication of the case and hence. effect (1) The confirmation of the sale shall divest the rights in the property of all parties to the action and shall vest their rights in the purchaser. 396). 3 includes one vital effect: The equity of redemption of the mortgagor or redemptioner is cut-off and there will be no further redemption. (2) The import of Sec. (3) The order of confirmation is appealable and if not appealed within the period for appeal becomes final. . and (d) An admonition that in default of such payment the property shall be sold at public auction to satisfy the judgment (Sec. Sale of mortgaged property. The title vests in the purchaser upon a valid confirmation of the sale and retroacts to the date of sale (Grimalt vs. unless allowed by law (as in the case of banks as mortgagees). no equity of redemption may further be exercised. (3) The period granted to the mortgagor for the payment of the amount found due by the court is not just a procedural requirement but s substantive right given by law to the mortgagee as his first chance to save his property from final disposition at the foreclosure sale (De Leon vs. 3). (b) A judgment of the sum found due. Upon the finality of the order of confirmation or upon the expiration of the period of redemption when allowed by law. (c) An order that the amount found due be paid to the court or to the judgment obligee within the period of not less than 90 days nor more than 120 days from the entry of judgment. including interest and other charges as approved by the court. once confirmed. 119). 36 Phil. Ibañez. if any. 95 Phil. The equity of redemption starts from the ninety-day period set in the judgment of the court up to the time before the sale is confirmed by an order of the court. 3). shall be entitled to the possession of the property and he may secure a writ of possession. subject to such rights of redemption as may be allowed by law (Sec. as well as costs.14 (a) An ascertainment of the amount due to the plaintiff upon the mortgage debt or obligation. the purchaser at the auction sale or last redemptioner. Vasquez. motion. 2). from the court which ordered the foreclosure unless a third party is actually holding the same adversely to the judgment obligor (Sec. upon.
61 Phil. upon motion. . The deficiency judgment shall be rendered upon motion of the mortgagee. 52 Phil. Note that the deficiency judgment is in itself a judgment hence. also appealable. of PI vs. 6).15 Disposition of proceeds of sale (1) The proceeds of the sale of the mortgaged property shall. (2) No independent action need be filed to recover the deficiency from the mortgagor. Torralba. 852). vs. Echaus Tan Siua. it is believed that a deficiency judgment under Sec. jurisdiction over his person could not have been acquired. A deficiency judgment is by nature in personam and jurisdiction over the person is mandatory. Before that. mortgagee may have to file a separate suit against the principal debtor. Execution may issue immediately if the balance is all due the plaintiff shall be entitled to execution at such time as the remaining balance shall become due and such due date shall be stated in the judgment (Sec. Deficiency judgment (1) If there be a balance due to the plaintiff after applying the proceeds of the sale. 6 would not be procedurally feasible. be paid to the person foreclosing the mortgage. any court order to recover the deficiency is void (Govt. 689). The motion must be made only after the sale and after it is known that a deficiency exists. It has been held that the mortgagor who is not the debtor and who merely executed the mortgage to secure the principal debtor’s obligation. 4). the same shall be paid to junior encumbrancers in the order of their priority. the same shall be paid to the mortgagor or any person entitled thereto (Sec. Having been outside the country. If there be any further balance after paying them or if there be no junior encumbrancers. shall render judgment against the defendant for any such balance. is not liable for the deficiency unless he assumed liability for the same in the contract (Philippine Trust Co. the court. after deducting the costs of the sale. Since a deficiency judgment cannot be obtained against the mortgagore who is not the debtor in the principal obligation. Instances when court cannot render deficiency judgment (1) Where the debtor-mortgagor is a non-resident and who at the time of the filing of the action for foreclosure and during the pendency of the proceedings was outside the Philippines. and when there shall be any balance or residue after paying off the mortgage debt due.
the judgment in favor of the foreclosure sale. Judicial foreclosure (Rule 68) Complaint is filed with the courts. Mortgagee is given a special power of Mortgagee need not be given a special attorney in the mortgage contract to power of attorney. May be exercised even after the There is no right of redemption in a judicial foreclosure sale provided it is made before foreclosure of mortgage under Rule 68. consolidation of ownership. Right of Redemption A right granted to a debtor mortgagor. No right of redemption except when mortgagee is a banking institution. his successor in interest or any judicial creditor or judgment creditor or any person having a lien on the property subsequent to the mortgage or deed of trust under which the property is sold to repurchase the property within one year even after the confirmation of the sale and even after the registration of the certificate of foreclosure sale. There is a right of redemption.16 Judicial foreclosure versus extrajudicial foreclosure Extra-judicial Foreclosure (Act 3135) No complaint is filed. judgment in the same action Buyer at public auction becomes absolute Buyer at public auction becomes absolute owner only after finality of an action for owner only after confirmation of the sale. foreclose the mortgaged property in case of default. Act 3135). If subsequent lien holders is only an equity of redemption which can are not impleaded as parties in the be exercised prior to the confirmation of foreclosure suit. This means that after the foreclosing mortgagee does not bind the foreclosure sale but before its . May also exist in favor or other General rule: In judicial foreclosures there encumbrances. Mortgagee has to file a separate action to Mortagagee can move for deficiency recover any deficiency. 3. equity of redemption only (90 to 120 days. Mortgagor has a right of redemption for 1 year from registration of the sale. Equity of redemption versus right of redemption Equity of Redemption The right of defendant mortgagor to extinguish the mortgage and retain ownership of the property by paying the debt within 90 to 120 days after the entry of judgment or even after the foreclosure sale but prior to confirmation. the sale is confirmed by order of the court. and any time before confirmation of foreclosure sale). This right of redemption exists only in extrajudicial foreclosures where there is always a right of redemption within one year from the date of sale (Sec. but interpreted by the Court to mean one year from the registration of the sale.
seek to secure a division for partition for themselves of the common property giving to each one of them the part corresponding to each . Q: how do you define partition of real estate? A: it is a judicial controversy between persons who being co – owners thereof. the law mentions the redemption period to be one year counted from the date of registration of the certificate in the Registry of Property RULE 69 .PARTITION INTRODUCTION Partition presupposes that there is co – ownership. 484). it has to conform with the co – owners. While the foreclosure sale. as mortgagor. because you cannot do easily what you want. Sometimes there is no growth in co – ownership. whether the foreclosure be extinguish the mortgage and retain judicial or extrajudicial. In this case. their confirmation. If not by banks. which is the foreclosure is in favor of banks as simply their right.17 the other lien holders. 47 secured debt prior to the confirmation of of the General Banking Law of 2000. the mortgagors merely Exception: there is a right of redemption if have an equity of redemption. Q: why do we have to use partition? A: because not all the time people want to own a certain thing or right in common with others. there is co – ownership whenever the ownership of an undivided thing or right belongs to different persons (art. proceeding has to be brought against them to require them to redeem from the first mortgagee or from the party acquiring the title to the mortgaged property. A separate foreclosure and prevent the confirmation of the sale. to mortgagees. This right of ownership of the property by paying the redemption is explicitly provided in Sec. and under our property law. the mortgagor may exercise equity of redemption remains his right of pay the proceeds of the sale unforeclosed.
all co – owners must be joined as defendants Q: what are the stages of partition A: (1) determination whether co – ownership exist and if partition is proper . and the court shall confirm the partition so agreed upon by all the parties. A final order decreeing partition and accounting may be appealed by any party aggrieved thereby. make the partition among themselves by proper instruments of conveyance.18 Accio commune debidendo – an action to enable those who own a property in common to put an end to the common ownership so as to vest in each a sole estate specific property or an allotment Section 1. Complaint in action for partition of real estate.description of the real estate . together with the order of the court confirming the same. Order for partition and partition by agreement thereunder. 4 and 5 .sections 3. — A person having the right to compel the partition of real estate may do so as provided in this Rule. Section 2. and such partition. therefore they are indispensible parties. if they are able to agree. — If after the trial the court finds that the plaintiff has the right thereto.nature and extent of his title . Q: who shall be named as parties? A: All of the co – owners Q: can the action proceed if we will omit one of the co – owners as defendant? A: NO. Thereupon the parties may. shall be recorded in the registry of deeds of the place in which the property is situated. it shall order the partition of the real estate among all the parties in interest. they should be joined Q: How initiated? A: By complaint stating: .sections 1 and 2 (2) get a commissioner to assist the court in determining how to divide . setting forth in his complaint the nature and extent of his title and an adequate description of the real estate of which partition is demanded and joining as defendants all other persons interested in the property.
Report of commissioners. having due regard to the improvements. the parties will be obliged to divide. and pay the others Or sell the real estate at public sale Section 6. Upon the filing of such report. and shall set apart the same to the parties in lots or parcels as will be most advantageous and equitable. situation and quality of the different parts thereof. the commissioners shall take and subscribe an oath that they will faithfully perform their duties as commissioners. after due notice to the parties to attend at such view and examination. commanding them to set off to the plaintiff and to each party in interest such part and proportion of the property as the court shall direct.19 Note: under section 2. . cannot be divided without prejudice to the interests of the parties. Oath and duties of commissioners. Assignment or sale of real estate by commissioners. the court may order it assigned to one of the parties willing to take the same. the clerk of court shall serve copies thereof on all the interested parties with notice that they are allowed ten (10) days within which to file objections to the findings of the report. (4a) Section 5. — If the parties are unable to agree upon the partition. or the sale of the same. In making the partition. and shall hear the parties as to their preference in the portion of the property to be set apart to them and the comparative value thereof. — When it is made to appear to the commissioners that the real state. Commissioners to make partition when parties fail to agree. if the court renders decision and finds out that there is co – ownership and partition is proper. What if they cannot decide how to divide? Which one gets this part? What if they cannot agree on the manner of partition? – that is the time you will apply the second stage. No proceeding had before or conducted by the commissioners and rendered judgment thereon. proceedings not binding until confirmed. — Before making such partition. provided he pays to the other parties such amount as the commissioners deem equitable. — The commissioners shall make a full and accurate report to the court of all their proceedings as to the partition. in which case the court shall order the commissioners to sell the real estate at public sale under such conditions and within such time as the court may determine. (5a) Note: Either assign the property to one of the co – owners. unless one of the interested parties asks that the property be sold instead of being so assigned. (3a) Section 4. if they so desire. or a portion thereof. Section 3. the court shall appoint not more than three (3) competent and disinterested persons as commissioners to make the partition. the commissioners shall view and examine the real estate. which oath shall be filed in court with the other proceedings in the case. or the assignment of real estate to one of the parties.
or set aside the report and appoint new commissioners. both of which can be appealed. Q: If there is two stages and two different orders. and may make such order and render such judgment as shall effectuate a fair and just partition of the real estate.20 Note: therefore the outcome of the appointment of commissioner which will be stated in his report could go either. 4. (7) When: expiration of 10 days to file objections or before expiration of 10 days but after the parties filed their objections the court may upon hearing. or accept the report in part and reject it in part. accept the report recommit to the commissioners for further report of facts set aside the report and appoint new commissioners accept or reject in part. after paying the others. Sell the real estate if parties oppose that it be assigned. — Upon the expiration of the period of ten (10) days referred to in the preceding section ( the period to file objections ) or even before the expiration of such period but after the interested parties have filed their objections to the report or their statement of agreement therewith the court may. accept the report and render judgment in accordance therewith. Q: how many orders or judgments in an action for partition? A: we have two. it can be appealed. and make such order and render such judgment as shall effectuate a fair and just partition . or. Action of the court upon commissioners report. between the several owners thereof. There is a partition It could be assigned to one of the co – owners. 5. upon hearing. and 6 Note: A final order decreeing partition and accounting may be appealed by any party aggrieved thereby. for cause shown recommit the same to the commissioners for further report of facts. (1) order of partition under section 2 last paragraph and (2) order on the manner of partition under sections 3. if assigned or sold as above provided. or of its value. (section 2 last paragraph) Therefore it is NOT interlocutory. what do you call this now? A: A civil action where multiple appeals are allowed Section 7.
what will you do with the 10 sq m? You cannot even put a toilet on that area. (9a) Section 10. If the whole property is assigned to one of the parties upon his paying to the others the sum or sums ordered by the court. free from the claims of any of the parties to the action. (10a) Section 11. and the judgment shall include an allowance for such rents and profits. In this case the property will be sold and just divide the proceeds. a party shall recover from another his just share of rents and profits received by such other party from the real estate in question. by metes and bounds and adequate description.21 Section 8. assign or to sell the same. and the effect of the judgment shall be to vest the real estate in the purchaser or purchasers making the payment or payments. including the compensation of the commissioners. and the effect of the judgment shall be to vest in each party to the action in severalty the portion of the real estate assigned to him. the commissioner may either help the parties divide. — If actual partition of property is made. which the minor or person judicially declared to be incompetent could do in partition proceedings if he were of age or competent. And as we have discussed. the judgment shall state definitely. or thing respecting the partition of real estate. — In an action for partition in accordance with this Rule. Costs and expenses to be taxed and collected. actual division is not practical like dividing a 100 sq m property among 10 persons. the particular portion of the real estate assigned to each party. (11a) Q: is the action for partition literally mean division of property? A: No. Power of guardian in such proceedings. copy to be recorded in registry of deeds. If the property is sold and the sale confirmed by the court. having regard to the interests of the parties. . (8a) Section 9. do and perform on behalf of his ward any act. the judgment shall state the name of the purchaser or purchasers and a definite description of the parcels of real estate sold to each purchaser. and the effect of the judgment shall be to vest in the party making the payment the whole of the real estate free from any interest on the part of the other parties to the action. Accounting for rent and profits in action for partition. the judgment shall state the fact of such payment and of the assignment of the real estate to the party making the payment. and the expenses of such recording shall be taxed as part of the costs of the action. with the approval of the court first had. A certified copy of the judgment shall in either case be recorded in the registry of deeds of the place in which the real estate is situated. — The court shall equitably tax and apportion between or among the parties the costs and expenses which accrue in the action. and execution may issue therefor as in other cases. because sometimes. matter. The judgment and its effect. — The guardian or guardian ad litem of a minor or person judicially declared to be incompetent may.
nor so as to restrict or prevent persons holding real estate jointly or in common from making an amicable partition thereof by agreement and suitable instruments of conveyance without recourse to an action. Then the property is subdivided into 10 titles. or destroy the right or title of any person claiming the real estate involved by title under any other person. — The provisions of this Rule shall apply to partitions of estates composed of personal property. or of both real and personal property. 1 hectare per title. Partition of personal property. there is no really transmission of rights. There is merely a designation and segregation of shares Q: can there be also partition of personal property? A: yes. a co – owner does not transfer his right to another co – owner. The partition does not affect the rights of third persons over the property because on partition. defeat. or by title paramount to the title of the parties among whom the partition may have been made. — Nothing in this Rule contained shall be construed so as to prejudice. . Q: the property is 10 hectares and the entire property is mortgaged in the bank. in so far as the same may be applicable.22 Section 12. Section 13 Section 13. In a partition. Neither paramount rights nor amicable partition affected by this Rule. What happens now to the mortgage? A: all the ten titles are also deemed mortgage.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.