Case Digest: Tañedo vs. Bernad, No. L-66520. August 30, 1988

Easement

CASE TITLE: Tañedo vs. Bernad

GR No/ Date: No. L-66520. August 30, 1988

PONENTE: Padilla, J.

CASE WITH THE SC: Petition for Review on Certiorari 

PROCEDURAL ANTECEDENTS:

  1. RTC - Legal redemption and damages

FACTS:

  • Antonio Cardenas owned two contiguous parcels of land in Cebu City: 

    1. Lot 7501-A with an apartment building, and 

    2. Lot 7501-B with various improvements including apartments, a house, and a bodega.

  • On February 5, 1982, Antonio Cardenas sold Lot 7501-A to Eduardo C. Tañedo and mortgaged Lot 7501-B to Tañedo as security for a loan of P10,000.

  • Antonio Cardenas agreed in writing that he would sell Lot 7501-B exclusively to Tañedo if he decided to sell it, due to shared infrastructure and a portion of Tañedo's building encroaching on Lot 7501-B.

  • Despite this agreement, Antonio Cardenas sold Lot 7501-B to Romeo and Pacita Sim, who subsequently blocked the sewage pipe connecting Tañedo's building to the septic tank on Lot 7501-B and demanded the removal of the encroaching portion of Tañedo's building.

  • Tañedo filed a legal action under Art. 1622 of the Civil Code for legal redemption and damages against Romeo and Pacita Sim, Antonio and Mae Linda Cardenas, the Register of Deeds of Cebu City, and Banco Cebuano.

  • Romeo and Pacita Sim claimed absolute ownership of Lot 7501-B and argued Tañedo had no right to redeem it under Art. 1622 since his land was smaller.

  • Antonio Cardenas admitted to agreeing to sell Lot 7501-B to Tañedo and claimed the sale to the Sims was an equitable mortgage to secure loans.

  • The Sims insisted their purchase of Lot 7501-B was absolute.

  • The Sims filed motions to dismiss the complaint and cross-claims for lack of cause of \

  • RTC: Respondent judge Hon. Juanita A. Bernad issued the questioned order dismissing the complaint and cross-claim.

ISSUE:


Whether Hon. Juanita A. Bernad erred in dismissing the complaint for legal redemption filed by the petitioner. YES


ARGUMENTS/LEGAL BASES  

PETITIONER

RESPONDENTS

  • Asserts his right to redeem Lot 7501-B under Article 1622 of the Civil Code, citing Antonio Cardenas' agreement to sell the lot exclusively to him.

  • Claims that the sale of Lot 7501-B to Romeo and Pacita Sim should be considered an equitable mortgage rather than an absolute sale, based on agreements and circumstances surrounding the transaction.

  • Alleges damages due to the Sims' actions, including blocking sewage access and demanding removal of a portion of his building.

  • The Sims argue absolute ownership of Lot 7501-B based on the sale deed executed by Antonio Cardenas in their favor.

    • They contend that Tañedo has no legal basis to redeem Lot 7501-B under Article 1622, asserting that Tañedo's property is smaller than the property being claimed for redemption.

    • They maintain that their actions, such as blocking the sewage pipe and demanding removal of encroachments, are within their rights as owners of Lot 7501-B.

  • Antonio Cardenas initially admitted to agreeing to sell Lot 7501-B to Tañedo and claimed the sale to the Sims was an equitable mortgage to secure loans.

PREVAILING PARTY: Petitioner

DECISION/DOCTRINE:


The Court finds merit in the petition. The dismissal of the complaint on the ground of lack of cause of action, is precipitate. The settled rule where dismissal of an action is sought on the ground that the complaint does not state a cause of action is, that the insufficiency of the cause of action must appear on the face of the complaint. And the test of the sufficiency of the ultimate facts alleged in the complaint to constitute a cause of action, is whether or not, admitting the facts alleged, the court can render a valid judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer of the complaint. For this purpose, the movant is deemed to admit hypothetically the truth of the facts thus averred. 


In the instant case, it cannot be denied that petitioner Tanedo cannot redeem the entire Lot 7501-B from the spouses Romeo and Pacita Sim pursuant to the provisions of Art. 1622 Romeo and Pacita Sim pursuant to the provisions of Art. 1622 of the Civil Code, since the lot sought to be redeemed, has an area of 612 square meters which is much bigger, area-wise, than the lot owned by petitioner Tañedo. However, the petitioner seeks to purchase only that small portion of Lot 7501-B occupied by his apartment building, because the spouses Romeo and Pacita Sim had told him to remove that portion of his building which enroaches upon Lot 7501-B. Whether or not this is possible should have been determined at the pre-trial stage or trial on the merits.


Besides, the action of petitioner Tañedo is also one for recovery of damages by reason of breach of promise by the respondent Antonio Cardenas to sell Lot 7501-B. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the amended complaint read, as follows:


3. That by written agreement, plaintiff and defendant spouses Antonio Cardenas and Mae Linda Cardenas agreed that in the event they decide to sell the adjacent Lot No. 7501-B of the subdivision plan (LRC) Psd. 23638, a portion of Lot No. 7501 of the cadastral survey of Cebu, LRC (GLRC) Cad. Record No. 9465, situated in the City of Cebu, containing an area of SIX HUNDRED TWELVE (612) Square meters more or less which lot is adjacent to Lot No. 7501-A of the plaintiff and where part of the plaintiffs apartment is standing on, the same should be sold to the plaintiff, but far from compliance of the written agreement, defendant spouses Antonio Cardenas and Mae Linda Cardenas sureptiously [sic] sold the aforestated Lot No. -7501-B- to the defendant spouses, Romeo Sim and Pacita Sim on July 23, 1982 as per Deed of Sale notarized by Notary Public, Jorge S. Omega and entered in his Notarial Register as Doc. No. 462; Page No. -94- Book No. 11, Series of 1982;


4. That due to the sale by the defendant spouses Antonio Cardenas and Mae Linda Cardenas of the property in question to spouses Romeo Sim and Pacita Lim, plaintiff suffered moral damages in the form of mental anguish, sleepless nights, mental torture, for which he is entitled to a compensation in the amount to be established during the trial of the case and has incurred litigation expenses subject for reimbursentent and attorneys fee in the sum of P10,000.00 which should be chargeable to both defendant spouses;


and the plaintiff (herein petitioner) prayed, among others: "(c) That defendant spouses Romeo Sim and Pacita Sim and spouses Antonio Cardenas and Mae Linda Cardenas be ordered to pay plaintiff moral damages, litigation expenses and attorneys fees in the amount of P50,000.00." 


That there was a written agreement, as alleged in the complaint, between the plaintiff Eduardo Tañedo and the defendant Antonio Cardenas is admitted by the latter. In his answer, he alleged the following:


ALLEGATIONS as to written agreement is ADMITTED, but, specifically denies that herein defendants SUREPTIOUSLY [sic] SOLD the lot in question to the other defendant Spouses Sim the truth is, that the herein defendants [sic] was required to execute the Deed of Sale described in this paragraph 3 as security for the personal loans and other forms of indebtedness incurred from the Spouses Sims but never as a conveyance to transfer ownership;


Considering this admission of defendant Cardenas, and that his promise to sell Lot 7501-B to Eduardo Tañedo appears to be for a valuable consideration, a trial is necessary to determine, at the very least, the amount of damages suffered by the plaintiff Eduardo Tafiedo by reason of such breach of promise to sell, if indeed there is such a breach.


Moreover, the finding of the trial court that petitioner Tañedo's right to continue to use the septic tank, erected on Lot 7501-B, ceased upon the subdivision of the land and its subsequent sale to different owners who do not have the same interest, also appears to be contrary to law. 


Article 631 of the Civil Code enumerates the grounds for the extinguishment of an easement. Said article provides:


Art. 631. Easements are extinguished:


(1) By merger in the same person of the ownership of the dominant and servient estates;


(2) By non-user for ten years; with respect to discontinuous easements, this period shall be computed from the day on which they ceased to be used; and, with respect to continuous easements, from the day on which an act contrary to the same took place;


(3) When either or both of the estates fall into such condition that the easement cannot be used; but it shall revive if the subsequent condition of the estates or either of them should again permit its use, unless when the use becomes possible, sufficient time for prescription has elapsed, in accordance with the provisions of the preceding number;


(4) By the expiration of the term or the fulfillment of the conditions, if the easement is temporary or conditional;


(5) By the renunciation of the owner of the dominant estate;


(6) By the redemption agreed upon between the owners of the dominant and servient estates.


As can be seen from the above provisions, the alienation of the dominant and servient estates to different persons is not one of the grounds for the extinguishment of an easement. On the contrary, use of the easement is continued by operation of law. Article 624 of the Civil Code provides:


Art. 624. The existence of an apparent sign of easement between two estates, established or maintained by the owner of both, shall be considered, should either of them be alienated, as a title in order that the easement may continue actively and passively, unless, at the time the ownership of the two estates is divided, the contrary should be provided in the title of conveyance of either of them, or the sign aforesaid should be removed before the execution of the deed. This provision shall also apply in case of the division of a thing owned in common by two or more persons.


In the instant case, no statement abolishing or extinguishing the easement of drainage was mentioned in the deed of sale of Lot 7501-A to Eduardo Tañedo. Nor did Antonio Cardenas stop the use of the drain pipe and septic tank by the occupants of Lot 7501-A before he sold said lot to Eduardo Tafiedo. Hence, the use of the septic tank is continued by operation of law. Accordingly, the spouses Romeo and Pacita Sim the new owners of the servient estate (Lot 7501- B), cannot impair, in any manner whatsoever, the use of the servitude. 


WHEREFORE, the Orders complained of are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The respondent judge or another one designated in his place is directed to proceed with the trial of this case on the merits. With costs against private respondents.


SO ORDERED.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Equality and Human Rights: The United Nations and Human Rights System (September 16, 2023)

Sovereign Equality of States/Principle of sovereign equality UN Charter of 1945 All states are equal before international law no matter the size of their territory, population, economy or military. All states have equal rights and duties under international law, and that no state has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state. Positive Consequences: All states have a voice in international affairs .   All states have the opportunity to participate in international organizations and to negotiate and conclude treaties. This helps to ensure that the interests of all states are represented in the development of international law and policy. No state has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state.  This helps to protect the sovereignty of all states and to prevent the use of force or coercion to achieve political objectives. States have the right to develop their own political, economic, and social systems without interference from othe...
Read more

Commercial Laws 1: R.A. No. 11057 — Personal Property Security Act

  Commercial Law TITLE XVI Personal Property Security Act Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises are sources of growth and innovation. They contribute to and benefit from future growth. Their increased participation in global trade "can have significant impact in reducing poverty through employment creation, productivity improvements and economies of scale." Congress passed the Personal Property Security Act in order to provide Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) more access to "credit at the least cost through the establishment of a unified and modern legal framework for securing obligations with personal property ." It was explained:  According to the 2015 Philippine Statistics Authority data, there are 896,839 micro-small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) that established in the Philippines.  These MSMEs generated a total of 4,784,870 jobs in 2015 versus 2,181,819 for the large enterprises.  This indicates that the MSMEs contributed almost 61 % o...
Read more

Land Title and Deeds: Chapter 1 — What Lands are Capable of Being Registered

Chapter I What Lands are Capable of Being Registered All lands in the Philippines are presumed to be lands of the public domain, and therefore, owned by the State. This rule finds support in Section 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution:  Section 2 . All lands of the public domain , waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State . With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least 60 per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be fo...
Read more