G.R. No. 177611 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES), VS. RODOLFO L. LEGASPI, SR., QUEROBIN L. LEGASPI, OFELIA LEGASPI-MUELA, PURISIMA LEGASPI VDA. DE MONDEJAR, VICENTE LEGASPI, RODOLFO LEGASPI II, AND SPOUSES ROSALINA LIBO-ON AND DOMINADOR LIBO-ON.D E C I S I O N - Supreme

Ruling

WHEREFORE, an ORDER OF CONDEMNATION is hereby entered covering the above-mentioned parcels of land, [petitioner] having a lawful right to take the properties sought to be condemned, for the public use or purpose described in the complaint, upon payment of just compensation to be determined by three (3) Commissioners who shall ascertain and report to the court the just compensation for the properties sought to be taken. Appointment of the three (3) Commissioners is hereby held in abeyance to give the court sufficient time to select the three (3) competent and disinterested persons as Commissioners provided for under Section 5 of Rule 67 of the Revised Rules of Court. Notify Counsels. Considering that the foregoing condemnation order covered only three (3) of the ten (10) lots comprising the subject property, petitioner moved for the continuation of the condemnation proceedings insofar as the remaining seven lots were concerned. [14] On 10 November 1994, petitioner also filed an amended complaint, impleading as additional defendants the Rural Bank of Miag-ao (Iloilo), Inc. (RBMI), the Philippine National Bank (PNB) and the Iloilo Finance Corporation (IFC), in view of the mortgages constituted in their favor by respondents over some of the lots into which the Lot 1 had been subdivided. [15] Claiming to have relied on the certificates of title presented to them by the mortgagors, however, RBMI, PNB and IFC filed their individual answers maintaining that the said mortgages were entered into for value and in good faith. [16] The issues thus joined and the pre-trial conference subsequently terminated, the RTC went on to issue the 7 July 1997 pre-trial order summarizing the parties admissions, their respective positions as well as the issues to be tried in the case. [17] On 13 April 1998, the Office of the UPV Chancellor sent respondent Rodolfo Legaspi a letter, protesting against the latters occupation of a portion of the property in litigation. [18] Calling the RTCs attention to its 2 September 1991 Order which allowed UPVs continued possession of the property, petitioner also filed its 7 July 1998 manifestation and motion praying for the grant of a writ of possession over the entirety of Lot 1. [19] Without resolving the motion, however, the RTC went on to issue the 16 June 2000 order, [20] fixing the just compensation for Lot Nos. 21609-B, 21609-C and 21609-E, based on the evidence adduced by the parties and the report submitted by the commissioners, to wit: WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, order is hereby issued fixing the just compensation of subject Lots Nos. 21609-B, 21609-C and 21609-E covering a total area of 8,516 sq. meters, as fifty one thousand ninety six pesos (P51,096.00) at the rate of six pesos (P6.00) per sq. meter. Accordingly, the [petitioner] is hereby ordered to pay [respondents] Judge Rodolfo L. Legaspi, et al fifty one thousand ninety six pesos (P51,096.00) for the total just compensation of the three (3) aforemention