G.R. No. L-9759; January 11, 1916
THE PHILIPPINE RAILWAY COMPANY, plaintiff-appellee, vs. IGNACIO DURAN, ET AL., defendants. LUCINA ANDRADA, LUCIO ECHIVERE and SERAFIN ADVINCULA, appellants.

FACTS:
The Philippine Railway Company filed an expropriation case in the Court of First Instance of Capiz to acquire certain lands for railway purposes. The complaint alleged that part of the land was public and part was privately owned by several individuals, with an estimated total value of about ₱900. Various oppositions were filed by claimants. The court initially found the expropriation necessary and appointed commissioners to appraise the land. After proceedings and the submission of reports, the court approved the commissioners’ findings and awarded compensation to the proven landowners. Three claimantsLucina Andrada, Lucio Echivere, and Serafin Advinculaappealed the decision.

ISSUE:
1. Whether the lower court erred in accepting the commissioners’ report on the valuation and area of the expropriated lands.

3. Whether the lower court erred in ordering the compensation deposited with the clerk of court instead of paid directly to the landowners.

RULING:
1. On the commissioners’ report: The Supreme Court found no error in the lower court’s acceptance of the commissioners’ report. The commissioners exercised due diligence, personally inspected the properties, heard witnesses from both sides, and applied proper valuation rules. The findings on the area (e.g., 1,107 square meters for Andrada’s land, not 1,449 square meters) and value were supported by evidence, including engineering plans.

3. On deposit of compensation: The Court held that the lower court did not err in ordering the compensation deposited with the clerk of court, as the landowners’ appeal indicated their dissatisfaction with the award. However, it noted that payment directly to the landowners, with the plaintiff’s consent, would also have been permissible.

The appeals of Serafin Advincula and Lucio Echivere were similarly resolved. Advincula’s claim that the judgment was based solely on the commissioners’ report was rejected, as the court considered both documentary and oral evidence. Echivere was likewise granted interest on his award from the date of taking.

DISPOSITIVE: The judgment of the lower court was AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. The landowners are entitled to interest at 6% per annum on their respective compensation awards from the date the Philippine Railway Company took possession of their lands. The records were remanded to the lower court to ascertain the specific dates of taking and to render judgment accordingly. No costs were awarded in this instance.

Separate Opinions: Justice Carson concurred but opined that interest should not run on funds already deposited in court after the judgment date, citing Philippine Railway Co. v. Solon. Justice Trent concurred with Carson.