G.R. No. 211731, December 7, 2016
National Power Corporation, Petitioner, v. Spouses Conchita Malapascua-Malijan and Lazaro Malijan, Respondents. [G.R. No. 211818] Conchita Malapascua-Malijan and Heirs of Lazaro Malijan, Petitioners, v. National Power Corporation, Respondent. (Dissenting Opinion of Justice Velasco, Jr.)

FACTS

The National Power Corporation (NPC) filed a complaint for expropriation on October 25, 2005, concerning a parcel of land owned by the Spouses Malijan. However, the NPC had already entered and occupied the property for its power transmission lines as early as 1972, thirty-three years prior to the filing of the expropriation suit. The landowners were deprived of possession and beneficial use of their property from that initial entry. The central dispute involves the proper date for the valuation of just compensation: whether it should be based on the market value at the time of the actual taking in 1972 or at the time of the filing of the expropriation complaint in 2005.

ISSUE

Whether just compensation for the property taken by the state through its agent, the NPC, should be reckoned from the date of the actual physical taking in 1972 or from the date of the filing of the expropriation complaint in 2005.

RULING

Justice Velasco, in his dissenting opinion, argues that just compensation must be based on the property’s value as of the date the expropriation complaint was filed in 2005, not 1972. The legal logic is anchored on the constitutional requirements of due process and just compensation. A valid exercise of eminent domain requires the government to initiate condemnation proceedings before taking possession of private property. The filing of the complaint serves as the requisite notice to the landowner and provides the government with the legal authority to take possession, typically upon posting the required deposit.
Since the NPC occupied the land in 1972 without first filing an expropriation case, that initial taking was unlawful. The government had no “color of legal authority” to deprive the owners at that time. To compute compensation based on the 1972 value would sanction a deceptive practice whereby the government occupies land indefinitely, benefits from its use, and only later formalizes the taking to lock in a lower, outdated valuation, to the severe detriment of the landowner. This circumvents constitutional safeguards. Justice Velasco cites National Power Corporation v. Court of Appeals, which held that valuation should be based on the date of the filing of the suit, not the earlier date of occupation, to prevent such unfairness. Therefore, the lawful taking only commenced with the filing of the complaint in 2005, making that the proper reckoning date for just compensation.