NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION VS. CA- Easement and Just Compensation

When a land, originally public land is awarded to a provate individual, a legal easement may be constituted and thus no just compensation is required. It would be otherwise if the land were originally private property, in which case, just compensation must be paid for the taking of a part thereof for public use as an easement of a right of way.

FACTS:

A free patent over three (3) hectares of land, situated in the province of Cagayan was issued in the name of Vicente Manglapus, and registered under OCT No. P-24814. The land was granted subject to the following proviso expressly stated in the title:

"... it shall not be subject to any encumbrance whatsoever in favor of any corporation, association or partnership except with the consent of the grantee and the approval of the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources and solely for educational, religious or charitable purposes or for a right of way; and subject finally to all conditions and public easements and servitudes recognized and prescribed by law especially those mentioned in sections 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 and 114 of Commonwealth Act No. 141 as amended..."

Subsequently, respondent Manglapus acquired the lot from Vicente Manglapus by absolute sale.
Sometime in 1982, NIA was to construct canals in Amulung, Cagayan and Alcala, Cagayan. NIA then entered a portion of Manglapus' land and made diggings and fillings thereon. Manglapus filed a complaint for damages against NIA.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the NIA should pay Manglapus just compensation for the taking of a portion of his property for use as easement of a right of way.

RULING: No.

The transfer certificate of title contains such a reservation. It states that title to the land shall be:
". . . subject to the provisions of said Land Registration Act and the Public Land Act, as well as those of Mining Laws, if the land is mineral, and subject, further to such conditions contained in the original title as may be subsisting."

Under the Original Certificate of Title, there was a reservation and condition that the land is subject to "to all conditions and public easements and servitudes recognized and prescribed by law especially those mentioned in Sections 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 and 114, Commonwealth Act No. 141, as amended." This reservation, unlike the other provisos imposed on the grant, was not limited by any time period and thus is a subsisting condition.

Section 112, Commonwealth Act No. 141, provides that lands granted by patent,
"shall further be subject to a right of way sot exceeding twenty meters in width for public highways, railroads,irrigation ditches, aqueducts, telegraphs and telephone lines, and similar works..."

We note that the canal NIA constructed was only eleven (11) meters in width. This is well within the limit provided by law. Manglapus has therefore no cause to complain.

Article 619 of the Civil Code provides that, "Easements are established either by law or by the will of the owners. The former are called legal and the latter voluntary easements." In the present case, we find and declare that a legal easement of a right-of-way exists in favor of the government.

The land was originally public land, and awarded to respondent Manglapus by free patent. The ruling would be otherwise if the land were originally private property, in which case, just compensation must be paid for the taking of a part thereof for public use as an easement of a right of way.