G.R. No. L-19432 February 26, 1965
COTABATO TIMBERLAND CO., INC., plaintiff-appellant, vs. PLARIDEL LUMBER CO., INC., defendant-appellee.

FACTS

The parties are both producers and exporters of logs holding separate but adjacent forest concessions in Cotabato. Their common boundary line, as described in their respective timber licenses, had no visible marker on the ground. The plaintiff-appellant, Cotabato Timberland Co., Inc., filed a complaint with two causes of action. First, it alleged that in 1958, the defendant-appellee, Plaridel Lumber Co., Inc., illegally logged within Cotabato’s licensed area along the common boundary. A resurvey of the boundary was conducted by Forester Isabelo Tobias, who inventoried stumps and computed the volume of logs taken, but this survey was later disapproved by Bureau of Forestry authorities. Second, Cotabato alleged that from November 1959 to February 1960, Plaridel, without prior notice, entered Cotabato’s concession to construct a road (requested by Edcor settlers) and cut, hauled, and removed approximately 600,000 board feet of timber. Plaridel later obtained a right-of-way permit from the District Forester in January 1960 and from the Director of Forestry in February 1960, subject to the condition that logs cut along the right-of-way be turned over to Cotabato. Plaridel admitted hauling the timber but defended its actions based on the settlers’ request and the subsequently obtained permits. The trial court dismissed the complaint, leading to a direct appeal to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

1. Whether the defendant-appellee is liable for damages for the alleged 1958 logging along the common boundary.
2. Whether the defendant-appellee is liable for damages for its entry, road construction, and logging within the plaintiff-appellant’s concession from November 1959 to February 1960.

RULING

1. On the first cause of action (1958 logging), the Supreme Court ruled against the plaintiff-appellant. The Court agreed with the trial court that the resurvey by Forester Tobias, upon which Cotabato based its claim, was inaccurate and was disapproved by the Bureau of Forestry. The survey relied on courses and distances instead of following the original Pls (Public Land Survey) monuments indicated in the control map, which control boundaries. There was no evidence these monuments had been moved. Furthermore, Cotabato’s failure to seek administrative review of the Bureau’s rejection of the Tobias survey rendered that rejection final against it.
2. On the second cause of action (1959-1960 entry and logging), the Supreme Court reversed the trial court and ruled in favor of the plaintiff-appellant. The Court held that Plaridel’s entry and logging in November 1959 were illegal, as they were done without notice to or consent from Cotabato and before any permit was secured. The subsequent permits issued in January and February 1960 did not retroactively legalize the prior unauthorized acts. Under Section 1837 of the Revised Administrative Code, forest products unlawfully taken from a licensed area must be delivered to the proper licensee. The condition in the Director of Forestry’s permit also obligated Plaridel to turn over the logs to Cotabato. Plaridel failed to turn over 551,663.84 board feet of the total 600,000 board feet taken (Cotabato having received 88,336.16 board feet). The Court awarded compensatory damages of P61,399.66 for the value of these logs. Additionally, due to Plaridel’s brazen defiance of administrative orders and disregard of Cotabato’s rights, the Court awarded exemplary damages of P10,000.00 and attorney’s fees of P5,000.00. The decision appealed from was reversed.