G.R. No. L-6891, March 8, 1912
THE MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, plaintiff-appellant, vs. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL, ET AL., defendants; MAURO PRIETO, appellant.

FACTS

The Manila Railroad Company filed a condemnation proceeding to acquire land for extending its railway line from Calamba to Santa Cruz. Among the defendants was Mauro Prieto, a tenant on government land (Hacienda de los Frailes), who was entitled to compensation for improvements (mejoras) on the condemned land due to a waiver by the government in his favor. The trial court appointed commissioners who assessed the value of the land and improvements. Their majority report, with slight modifications by the court, awarded Prieto damages totaling P16,778 for various improvements, including plants and trees (e.g., naranjitos, abacas, platanos). The railroad company appealed, arguing the award was excessive, while Prieto cross-appealed, contending the damages should be higher based on the evidence.

ISSUE

1. Whether the compensation awarded for the improvements was grossly excessive.
2. Whether damages for improvements destroyed by fire on lands adjoining the condemned property, allegedly caused by the railroad company’s agents, are recoverable in the condemnation proceedings.

RULING

1. On the valuation of improvements: The Supreme Court found no evidence to support the claim that the valuations were grossly excessive. The commissioners’ detailed report was based on sufficient evidence, and the trial court had already reduced the price of young orange trees from P2 to P1.50 per tree, which the Court deemed just and reasonable. Since the railroad company failed to present evidence to contest the valuations during the proceedings, it could not demand a new trial based on unsupported allegations.

2. On damages for improvements destroyed by fire: The Court ruled that such damages were not recoverable in the condemnation proceedings. Under Section 244 of Act No. 190, commissioners are only authorized to assess the value of property “taken and used” for the railway. The fire-damaged improvements were on adjoining lands not actually condemned. Therefore, any liability for those damages must be pursued in a separate action, not in the expropriation case. The trial court erred in including P1,500 (representing the fire damage award) in the judgment.

DISPOSITIVE:
The judgment was modified by reducing the damages awarded to Prieto from P16,778 to P15,278 (deducting the P1,500 for fire damage). As modified, the judgment was affirmed, with no costs awarded.