G.R. No. 201781, December 10, 2014
ANNIE GERONIMO, SUSAN GERONIMO AND SILVERLAND ALLIANCE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, Petitioners, vs. SPS. ESTELA C. CALDERON AND RODOLFO T. CALDERON, Respondents.

FACTS

Respondents Spouses Estela and Rodolfo Calderon, residents of Silverland Subdivision, filed a complaint before the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) against Silverland Realty & Development Corporation, Silverland Village I Homeowners Association, Silverland Alliance Christian Church (SACC), and individual Geronimo family members (Joel, Annie, Jonas, and Susan). The complaint alleged that a building constructed beside the house of Joel and Annie Geronimo, initially represented as a family extension, was being used as a church by SACC. The church activities, including daily worship, baptisms, choir rehearsals, and use of loud sound systems until late evening, caused noise disturbance affecting the respondents’ health and convenience. The respondents sought to enforce the Contract to Sell and subdivision restrictions, which stipulated that the lot shall be used exclusively for a single-family residential building. The HLURB Arbiter ruled in favor of the respondents, ordering petitioners to cease using the property for religious purposes. This decision was affirmed by the HLURB Board of Commissioners, the Office of the President, and the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming that the HLURB has jurisdiction over the controversy and in upholding the HLURB’s ruling prohibiting the use of the property for religious purposes.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision. On jurisdiction, the Court held that the HLURB has exclusive jurisdiction over the case. Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the complaint, which in this case sought the enforcement of the Contract to Sell and statutory obligations of the subdivision developer under Presidential Decree No. 957, specifically the obligation to maintain the residential character of the subdivision as per the approved plan and Deed of Restrictions. The complaint falls under the HLURB’s jurisdiction over cases involving specific performance of contractual and statutory obligations filed by subdivision lot buyers against the owner, developer, or homeowners’ association. The Court also upheld the HLURB’s ruling, finding that the use of the property as a church violated the residential use covenant. The HLURB’s taking judicial notice of the Development Permit, which indicated the lot’s residential use, was proper. The petitioners, as beneficiaries of the violation, were correctly deemed indispensable parties to the action. The decisions of the HLURB, OP, and CA were supported by substantial evidence.