Cebu Vs Bercilles (66 Scra 481)

G.R. No.
L40474
August 29, 1975
CEBU OXYGEN & ACETYLENE CO., INC., petitioner,

vs.
HON. PASCUAL A. BERCILLES Presiding Judge, Branch XV, 14 th Judicial District,
and JOSE L. ESPELETA, Assistant Provincial Fiscal, Province of Cebu,
representing the Solicitor Generals Office and the Bureau of Lands, respondents.
Jose Antonio R Conde for petitioner.
Office of the Acting Solicitor General Hugo E. Gutierrez, Jr., Assistant Solicitor General
Octavio R. Ramirez and Trial Attorney David R. Hilario for respondents. .
DECISION
CONCEPCION, Jr., J.:
This is a petition for the review of the order of the Court of First Instance of Cebu
dismissing petitioners application for registration of title over a parcel of land situated in
the City of Cebu.
The parcel of land sought to be registered was only a portion of M. Borces Street,
Mabolo, Cebu City. On September 23, 1968, the City Council of Cebu, through
Resolution No. 2193, approved on October 3, 1968, declared the terminal portion of M.
Borces Street, Mabolo, Cebu City, as an abandoned road, the same not being included
in the City Development Plan. 1 Subsequently, on December 19, 1968, the City Council
of Cebu passed Resolution No. 2755, authorizing the Acting City Mayor to sell the land
through a public bidding. 2 Pursuant thereto, the lot was awarded to the herein petitioner
being the highest bidder and on March 3, 1969, the City of Cebu, through the Acting
City Mayor, executed a deed of absolute sale to the herein petitioner for a total
consideration of P10,800.00. 3 By virtue of the aforesaid deed of absolute sale, the
petitioner filed an application with the Court of First instance of Cebu to have its title to
the land registered. 4
On June 26, 1974, the Assistant Provincial Fiscal of Cebu filed a motion to dismiss the
application on the ground that the property sought to be registered being a public road
intended for public use is considered part of the public domain and therefore outside the
commerce of man. Consequently, it cannot be subject to registration by any private
individual. 5
After hearing the parties, on October 11, 1974 the trial court issued an order dismissing
the petitioners application for registration of title. 6 Hence, the instant petition for review.
For the resolution of this case, the petitioner poses the following questions:
(1) Does the City Charter of Cebu City (Republic Act No. 3857) under Section 31,
paragraph 34, give the City of Cebu the valid right to declare a road as abandoned? and
(2) Does the declaration of the road, as abandoned, make it the patrimonial property of
the City of Cebu which may be the object of a common contract?
(1) The pertinent portions of the Revised Charter of Cebu City provides:
Section 31. Legislative Powers. Any provision of law and executive order to the contrary
notwithstanding, the City Council shall have the following legislative powers:
xxx xxx xxx
(34) ; to close any city road, street or alley, boulevard, avenue, park or square.
Property thus withdrawn from public servitude may be used or conveyed for any
purpose for which other real property belonging to the City may be lawfully used or
conveyed.
From the foregoing, it is undoubtedly clear that the City of Cebu is empowered to close
a city road or street. In the case of Favis vs. City of Baguio, 7 where the power of the city
Council of Baguio City to close city streets and to vacate or withdraw the same from
public use was similarly assailed, this court said:
5. So it is, that appellant may not challenge the city councils act of withdrawing a strip
of Lapu-Lapu Street at its dead end from public use and converting the remainder
thereof into an alley. These are acts well within the ambit of the power to close a city
street. The city council, it would seem to us, is the authority competent to determine
whether or not a certain property is still necessary for public use.
Such power to vacate a street or alley is discretionary. And the discretion will not
ordinarily be controlled or interfered with by the courts, absent a plain case of abuse or
fraud or collusion. Faithfulness to the public trust will be presumed. So the fact that
some private interests may be served incidentally will not invalidate the vacation
ordinance.
(2) Since that portion of the city street subject of petitioners application for registration
of title was withdrawn from public use, it follows that such withdrawn portion becomes
patrimonial property which can be the object of an ordinary contract.
Article 422 of the Civil Code expressly provides that Property of public dominion, when
no longer intended for public use or for public service, shall form part of the patrimonial
property of the State.
Besides, the Revised Charter of the City of Cebu heretofore quoted, in very clear and
unequivocal terms, states that: Property thus withdrawn from public servitude may be
used or conveyed for any purpose for which other real property belonging to the City
may be lawfully used or conveyed.
Accordingly, the withdrawal of the property in question from public use and its
subsequent sale to the petitioner is valid. Hence, the petitioner has a registerable title
over the lot in question.
WHEREFORE, the order dated October 11, 1974, rendered by the respondent court in
Land Reg. Case No. N-948, LRC Rec. No. N-44531 is hereby set aside, and the
respondent court is hereby ordered to proceed with the hearing of the petitioners
application for registration of title.
SO ORDERED.
Makalintal, C.J, Fernando, Barredo and Aquino, JJ., concur.

Cebu Vs Bercilles (66 Scra 481)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cebu Vs Bercilles (66 Scra 481)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cebu Vs Bercilles (66 Scra 481)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. No.

August 29, 1975

CEBU OXYGEN & ACETYLENE CO., INC., petitioner,

You might also like