AMIGABLE VS. CUENCA
Facts:
Victoria Amigable is the registered owner of a particular lot. At the back
of her Transfer Certificate of Title (1924), there was no annotation in favor
of the government of any right or interest in the property. Without prior
expropriation or negotiated sale, the government used a portion of the lot for
the construction of the Mango and Gorordo Avenues. On 1958, Amigable’s counsel
wrote the President of the Philippines, requesting payment of the portion of
the said lot. It was disallowed by the Auditor General in his 9th Endorsement.
Petitioner then filed in the court a quo a complaint against the Republic of
the Philippines and Nicolas Cuenca, in his capacity as Commissioner of Public
Highways for the recovery of ownership and possession of the lot. According to
the defendants, the action was premature because it was not filed first at the
Office of the Auditor General. According to them, the right of action for the
recovery of any amount had already prescribed, that the Government had not
given its consent to be sued, and that plaintiff had no cause of action against
the defendants.
Issue: Whether or Not, under the facts of the case, appellant may properly sue
the government.
Held:
In the case of Ministerio v. Court of First Instance of Cebu, it was held
that when the government takes away property from a private landowner for
public use without going through the legal process of expropriation or
negotiated sale, the aggrieved party may properly maintain a suit against the
government without violating the doctrine of governmental immunity from suit
without its consent. In the case at bar, since no annotation in favor of the
government appears at the back of the certificate of title and plaintiff has
not executed any deed of conveyance of any portion of the lot to the
government, then she remains the owner of the lot. She could then bring an action
to recover possession of the land anytime, because possession is one of the
attributes of ownership. However, since such action is not feasible at this
time since the lot has been used for other purposes, the only relief left is
for the government to make due compensation rice or value of the lot
at the time of the taking.