Public institutions must vacate property if owner has stronger claim — SC

As it ordered the Department of Education (DepEd) to vacate a parcel of land, the Supreme Court (SC) ruled that public institutions must vacate a land if it lacks permission and if the owner has a better right of possession.

In a 15-page decision promulgated in April, the Second Division affirmed the ruling of the Court of Appeals and regional trial court that ordered the Deped to vacate the property and return the land to its owner.

“A public institution with the power of eminent domain may not be ejected from a property devoted to public use, even without a title, if there is an express or implied acquiescence— in the form of delay in asserting rights— from the owner of the property,” it said.

“Conversely, a public institution may be ordered to vacate a property devoted to public use if it is shown that the owner did not consent to the occupation and that the owner has a better right of possession,” it added.

According to the SC, the owner bought a 10,637 square meter rice land in Cagayan in 2014 through an Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate with Waiver of Rights and Sale.

However, when the owner visited the land, it was occupied by a sch0ool under the DepEd Regional Office 2.

After receiving no reply to her demand letters, the owner filed a case to recover possession of the land and to remove any structures built on it.

For its part, the DepEd argued that the school had brought the land through a deed of sale in 1965 and has been occupying it since.

For its part, the SC found that the trial courts did not err in ruling that the owner had a better right to possess the land. It said she was able to prove her ownership of the property through a preponderance of evidence. 

“Petitioner failed to present any competent evidence of ownership over Lot No. 7421, in contrast to respondent, whose predecessors-in-interest were the registered owners of the property," it said.

"As such, the respondent has the right to recover possession of the lot,” it added.

However, the SC said that the findings does not preclude the State from initiating an expropriation case in a separate proceeding.

The decision was penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen.  — RSJ, GMA Integrated News