Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1968 > July 1968 Decisions > G.R. No. L-21059 July 29, 1968 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-21059. July 29, 1968.]

THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Petitioner, v. THE COURT OF APPEALS, ANITA U. LORENZANA, ET AL., Respondents.

Solicitor General for Petitioner.

Nereo J. Paculdo for Respondents.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; PROVISIONAL REMEDIES; INJUNCTION; WRIT AGAINST CITY ENGINEER TO PREVENT HIM FROM REVOKING CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, FINAL FOR FAILURE OF CITY ENGINEER TO APPEAL. — Where the original petition filed in the lower court was to enjoin the City Engineer from going through with his threatened act to revoke the petitioner’s permit or to suspend the force and effect of his letter of suspension and a writ of injunction is issued, and maintained after trial, by the lower court, the failure of the City Engineer to appeal shows that he was agreeable to the maintenance of the permit. Moreover, the judgment of the trial court has become final as to him and the appeal insisted upon by the Director of Lands who has intervened has no bearing on the injunctive suit; the effect of such finality of the judgment as to the City Engineer is as if he himself had set aside the order of suspension.

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT, A MINISTERIAL DUTY OF THE CITY ENGINEER. — It is the ministerial duty of the City Engineer to issue a building permit when the application and plans are in conformity with the requirements of building laws and ordinances and as long as there is no violation of building ordinances in the process of construction, said official has no ground for suspending the building permit issued; the suspension or revocation of permit without cause would be an arbitrary act and abuse of discretion.


D E C I S I O N


MAKALINTAL, J.:


Respondent Anita U. Lorenzana was the successful bidder in 1953 in the public sale of a quonset hut situated on a lot on Quezon Boulevard, Manila, which was part of the San Lazaro Estate administered by the Director of Lands. Before the sale she had a contract for the lease of the site, entered into with the Manila Railroad Company, which was then in occupancy thereof. The lease was impliedly recognized by the Bureau of Lands, to which the rents were being paid. The quonset hut was destroyed by accidental fire in 1958, and Lorenzana thereupon filed a lease application with the Bureau of Lands, which was approved in principle 1 for an area of 700 square meters. It seems, however, that a question subsequently developed because a number of former tenants of respondent Lorenzana also filed a lease application for an area of 360 square meters of the same property.

On August 25, 1959 Lorenzana obtained a building permit from the City Engineer of Manila for the construction of a three-storey building on the aforesaid lot. The construction was already well- advanced when the City Engineer, upon repeated representations of the Bureau of Lands, sent Lorenzana a letter dated October 5, 1959, suspending the construction work, with a threat to revoke the permit altogether if she refused to comply. The order of suspension triggered the original proceeding in the Court of First Instance of Manila, which was a petition filed by Lorenzana against the City Engineer to enjoin him "from going through with his threatened act to revoke petitioner’s building permit or to suspend the force and effect of respondent’s letter of suspension (sic)." As prayed for in the petition a writ of preliminary injunction was issued by the Court. The Director of Lands intervened and asked that the order granting the writ be reconsidered and that the suspension order be maintained "until the suit (between the petitioner and the intervenor) involving the rights of petitioner to lease and occupy portion of the San Lazaro Estate is finally decided by the Court of First Instance of Manila in Civil Case No. 41295 pending in Branch 2 of this Court."cralaw virtua1aw library

After trial judgment was rendered for petitioner Lorenzana, respondent here, maintaining the injunction previously issued. The Director of Lands appealed, but the City Engineer did not. On January 31, 1963 the Court of Appeals affirmed on four grounds, to wit:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"(1) The judgment below making permanent the writ of preliminary injunction against respondent City Engineer of Manila has become final with respect to said respondent who did not appeal.

(2) The case has become moot. The construction of Lorenzana’s three-story building under the building permit has been finished. And according to appellee, after the perfection of this present appeal, the Director of Lands had already openly agreed and acceded to petitioner’s making an additional fourth floor to her present three- story building. Hence, the issue in this appeal had already been rendered moot and abrogated by the subsequent acts of the . . . intervenor-appellant Director of Lands.

(3) Lorenzana was at least in material possession with the permission of the Bureau of Lands. The conflict of rights between Lorenzana and the Bureau of Lands with respect to her alleged right to build and to the improvements, which conflict is governed by stipulation and by the Civil Code, should be threshed out in an ordinary civil action. It was no concern of the City Engineer of Manila who has already issued the building permit.

(4) Respondent City Engineer of Manila had earlier rendered a determination, which in our opinion is correct, that, "it is the ministerial duty of the City Engineer to issue a building permit when the application and the plans are in conformity with the requirements of building laws and ordinances;" that, "As long as there is no violation of building ordinances in the process of construction, this Office has no ground for suspending the building permit issued," and that, "suspension or revocation of permit without cause would be an arbitrary act and abuse of discretion."cralaw virtua1aw library

The case is now before us on a petition for review by certiorari. We see no sufficient reason to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. Whether or not the suspension of the building permit issued by the City Engineer of Manila should be insisted upon is a matter that is primarily addressed to the discretion of that official. And his failure to appeal shows that he was agreeable to the maintenance of said permit. The judgment of the trial court has become final as to him, and the effect is as if he himself has set aside the order of suspension.

From petitioner’s motion for intervention presented below it appears that his interest was to have the said order maintained. If, as he now avers in the instant petition before us, he is opposed to the prosecution of the construction work on the building of respondent, the Court of Appeals is correct in holding that the case has become moot in view of its finding that the construction of the three-storey building under the building permit has been finished.

Whether or not the construction should be demolished, as prayed for by petitioner, is a question that cannot and should not be litigated in this case, which concerns only the building permit issued and then suspended by the City Engineer, but rather, as correctly held by the Court of Appeals, in a separate action where the right of respondent Lorenzana to lease and occupy the lot on which the building stands may be threshed out.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed, without pronouncement as to costs.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Dizon, Zaldivar, Sanchez, Castro, Angeles and Fernando, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. As found in the decision of respondent Court of Appeals, p. 5.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






July-1968 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-24990 July 3, 1968 - WILLIAM C. PFLEIDER v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-24804 July 5, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCIANO PARAYNO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-28561 July 8, 1968 - BARNEY FRENCH v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL

  • A.C. No. 102 July 15, 1968 - PAFLU v. HON. EMILIO C. TABIGNE

  • G.R. No. L-21175 July 15, 1968 - PASCUALA SOTTO PAHANG v. FILEMON SOTTO

  • G.R. No. L-18414 July 15, 1968 - ANTONIO M. PEREZ, ET AL v. J. ANTONIO ARANETA

  • G.R. No. L-24843 July 15, 1968 - MEMBERS OF THE CULT OF SAN MIGUEL ARCANGEL v. PEDRO NARCISO

  • G.R. No. L-24419 July 15, 1968 - LEONORA ESTOQUE v. ELENA M. PAJIMULA

  • G.R. No. L-24997 July 18, 1968 - PHIL. NATIONAL BANK v. TERESITA OSETE, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-21027 July 20, 1968 - JUAN GUTIERREZ, ET AL. v. LUCIANO T. CRUZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22002 July 20, 1968 - CANUTO A. LIM, ET AL. v. TOMAS V. SABARRE

  • G.R. No. L-24099 July 20, 1968 - CLOTILDE CORREOS, ET AL. v. LADISLAO VALENZUELA Y PEREZ, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24951 July 20, 1968 - IN RE: JOSE CHUA CHU v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-26197 July 20, 1968 - ADELO C. RIVERA v. SAN MIGUEL BREWERY CORP., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-18598 July 23, 1968 - TAN GUAN v. HON. MARIANO NABLE, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-22682 July 23, 1968 - GORGONIO PABILING v. ISIDORO PARINACIO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-23796 July 23, 1968 - LOURDES P. SAN DIEGO, ET AL v. HON. FERNANDO HERNANDEZ, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-23934 July 25, 1968 - HIDPION P. DEL ROSARIO, ET AL v. ABELARDO SUBIDO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-26353 July 29, 1968 - PERLA C. PACURSA v. SIMEON DEL ROSARIO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-26568 July 29, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIEGO MALILLOS

  • G.R. No. L-28842 July 29, 1968 - FAUSTINO CORTEZ v. HON. ONOFRE VILLALUZ, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24955 July 29, 1968 - AMERICAN INSURANCE COMP. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24566 July 29, 1968 - ACCFA v. ALPHA INSURANCE & SURETY CO., INC., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24576 July 29, 1968 - MARTINIANO P. VIVO, ET AL v. HON. AGUSTIN P. MONTESA, ET AL

  • G.R. Nos. L-24444-45 July 29, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO DORIQUEZ

  • G.R. No. L-24396 July 29, 1968 - SANTIAGO P. ALALAYAN, ET AL. v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24072 July 29, 1968 - ANTONIO MA. CUI, ET AL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. Nos. L-24020-21 July 29, 1968 - FLORENCIO REYES, ET AL v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19852 July 29, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANSUETO JAMERO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-23133 July 29, 1968 - VICENTE S. DEL ROSARIO, ET AL v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-23606 July 29, 1968 - ALHAMBRA CIGAR & CIGARETTE MANUFACTURING CO., INC. v. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-20158 July 29, 1968 - CANDELARIO ALMENDRAS, ET AL v. AMADO DEL ROSARIO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-21059 July 29, 1968 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-22320 July 29, 1968 - MERCEDES RUTH COBB-PEREZ, ET AL v. HON. GREGORIO LANTIN, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-20619 July 29, 1968 - REPARATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL v. HON. JUDGE HIGINIO B. MACADAEG, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-20794 July 29, 1968 - DY EN SIU CO, ET AL v. LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF THE CITY OF MANILA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-23919 July 29, 1968 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. HON. GUILLERMO S. SANTOS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24984 July 29, 1968 - PHIL. COMM., ELEC. & ELECTRICITY WORKERS’ FED., ET AL v. HON. JUDGE RAMON O. NOLASCO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24388 July 29, 1968 - REGAL MANUFACTURING EMP., ASSO., ET AL v. HON. ANDRES REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27741 July 29, 1968 - R.B. INDUSTRIAL DEV. CO., LTD., ET AL v. HON. MANUEL LOPEZ ENAGE, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-28524 July 29, 1968 - ERNESTO NAVARRO, ET AL v. HON. TITO V. TIZON, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24348 July 30, 1968 - FELICIDAD VIERNEZA v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

  • G.R. No. L-22304 July 30, 1968 - SAMAR MINING CO., INC. v. FRANCISCO P. ARNADO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-22159 July 31, 1968 - EMILIANO CASTRO, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24472 July 31, 1968 - PHIL. RABBIT BUS LINES, INC. v. PROSPERO GABATIN, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24924 July 31, 1968 - CRESENCIA ANTONEL, ET AL v. LAND TENURE ADMI., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-26192 July 31, 1968 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LORENZO MANA-AY, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24414 July 31, 1968 - DIONICIA J. CID, ET AL v. NANCY W. BURNAMAN, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-22663 July 31, 1968 - HOC HUAT TRADING, ET AL v. HON. GUILLERMO S. SANTOS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-23245 July 31, 1968 - JUANITA RIVERA v. SILVINO CURAMEN

  • G.R. No. L-23491 July 31, 1968 - TAURUS TAXI CO., INC., ET AL v. CAPITAL INSURANCE & SURETY CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-24140 July 31, 1968 - VICENTE ARRIETA v. MALAYAN SAWMILL COMPANY, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24557 July 31, 1968 - CITY OF MANILA v. TARLAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24668 July 31, 1968 - ANDRES LAPITAN v. SCANDIA INC., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24987 July 31, 1968 - CENTRAL AZUCARERA DON PEDRO v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COM., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-25550 July 31, 1968 - PLARIDEL SURETY & INS. CO., v. HON. W. DE LOS ANGELES, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-27072 July 31, 1968 - SURIGAO MINERAL RESERVATION BOARD, ET AL v. HON. GAUDENCIO CLORIBEL, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-26082 July 31, 1968 - NORBERTO DE LA REA v. HON. ABELARDO SUBIDO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-27084 July 31, 1968 - ANGELA ESTATE, INC., ET AL v. CFI NEGROS OCCI., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-22542 July 31, 1968 - LUZON STEVEDORING CORPORATION v. SALVADOR CELORIO, ET AL

  • A.C. No. 122-J July 31, 1968 - NICOLAS SUPERABLE, JR. v. HON. GODOFREDO ESCALONA

  • G.R. No. L-13938 July 31, 1968 - PEDRO BUTIONG v. SURIGAO CONSOLIDATED MINING CO. INC.

  • G.R. No. L-22577 July 31, 1968 - BENJAMIN WENCESLAO, ET AL. v. CARMEN ZARAGOZA, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-23261 July 31, 1968 - ERNESTO VELUZ v. SOCORRO VELUZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23689 July 31, 1968 - MAYO LOPEZ CARILLO, ET AL v. ALLIED WORKER’S ASSO. OF THE PHIL., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-24514 July 31, 1968 - SAURA IMPORT & EXPORT CO., INC., ET AL v. JUDGE ARSENIO SOLIDUM, ET AL