G.R. No. L-3738 November 20, 1951
Concepcion Abella, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Municipality of Naga, et al., defendants. Municipality of Naga, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The Municipality of Naga, by resolution, ordered the closing of a part of a municipal street (P. Prieto Street) that ran between the public market and the plaintiff’s property, using the closed thoroughfare to expand the market. As a consequence, the municipality allowed various constructions along the sidewalk abutting the plaintiff’s property and extending into the street, thereby depriving the plaintiff’s property of access to said street and retarding her reconstructions. The parties submitted an agreed statement of facts, stipulating that if damages were to be awarded, they should not exceed the sum of Three Hundred Pesos (P300). The plaintiff’s complaint alleged two causes of action, but the second was dismissed by the lower court without appeal. The municipality, as appellant, contended it acted pursuant to its police power to preserve peace and promote general welfare.

ISSUE

Whether the Municipality of Naga is liable to indemnify the plaintiff for damages resulting from the closing of the municipal street.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment sentencing the Municipality of Naga to pay the plaintiff P300 as damages. The basis for liability is Section 2246 of the Revised Administrative Code, which provides that no municipal road or street shall be closed without indemnifying any person prejudiced thereby. The Court found that the stipulated facts admitted the plaintiff suffered economic damage due to the loss of access to the street, and the indemnity assessed was within the bounds of the damages suffered, even appearing nominal. The municipality’s defense of having acted under its police power was deemed irrelevant, as the issue was not the lawfulness of its act but the statutory obligation to indemnify a prejudiced party. The appeal was held to be without merit.