G.R. No. L-3297. December 29, 1950.
LEE TAY & LEE CHAY, INC., plaintiff-appellee, vs. FLORENCIO CHOCO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Plaintiff Lee Tay & Lee Chay, Inc. owns a parcel of land in Manila. Defendant Florencio Choco owns a house occupying about 100 square meters of the land and has not paid rent since 1941. Plaintiff filed an ejectment case to recover possession for use as a lumber yard. The municipal court suspended proceedings upon receiving a letter from the Mayor of Manila stating the city’s intention to acquire the land under Commonwealth Act No. 538 and Republic Act No. 267 to resell it to the occupants. The Court of First Instance reversed, holding defendant was a squatter, not a tenant under the Act, and remanded the case for trial. Defendant appealed.

ISSUE

Whether the City of Manila may expropriate a small parcel of land under Commonwealth Act No. 538 to resell it to occupants, thereby justifying the suspension of the ejectment proceedings.

RULING

No. Following the doctrine in Guido v. Rural Progress Administration and City of Manila v. Arellano Law Colleges, Inc., Commonwealth Act No. 539 (and by extension, related acts like CA No. 538) authorizes the expropriation of large landed estates for subdivision and resale to tenants, not small urban parcels. The National Government itself cannot expropriate a small lot for such purpose, and it cannot confer such authority upon its instrumentalities like the City of Manila. Therefore, the City could not lawfully expropriate the land, and the ejectment proceedings should not have been suspended. The decision of the Court of First Instance is affirmed.

AI Generated by Armztrong.