Eden Ballatan and Sps. Betty Martinez and Chong Chy Ling v. CA G.R. No. 125!"# $2 Mar%h 1&&&# SEC'N( ()*)S)'N +,-no# J. /a%ts0 In 1985, 1985, Eden Eden Ballat Ballatan an const construc ructed ted her house house on Lot Lot No. No. 24 in Arane Araneta ta University illa!e, "ala#on. $urin! the construction, she noticed that the concrete %ence & side 'ath(ay o% the ad)oinin! house o% *inston +o encroached u'on the entire len!th o% the eastern side o% her 'ro'erty. er #uildin! contractor in%or-ed her that the area o% her lot (as actually less than that descri#ed in the title. Ballat Ballatan an in%or in%or-ed -ed +o a#out a#out the discr discre'a e'ancy ncy and encro encroac ach-e h-ent, nt, #ut +o clai-e clai-ed d that that his his house house inclu includin din! ! its %ence %ence and and 'ath( 'ath(ay/ ay/ (ere (ere #uilt #uilt (ithi (ithin n the 'ara-eters o% his %ather0s lot. he o(nerdevelo'er o(nerdevelo'er o% the su#division, su#division, Araneta Insitute o% A!riculture A!riculture AIA/ authori3ed a survey o% the land #y En!r. En!r. ose N. ueddin!. ueddin! %ound that the lot area o% Ballatan Ballatan (as less #y a %e( -eters & that o% Li 6hin! 6hin! 7ao 7ao lots a(ay/, a(ay/, increased #y 2 -eters. e declared that he -ade a verication survey o% the lots #elon!in! to +o in 198, and %ound the #oundaries to #e in order. o(ever he could not e:'lain the reduction in Ballatan0s area. En!r. ueddin! -ade another relocation survey u'on re;uest o% the 'arties. e %ound that Lot 24 lost a''ro:.. 25s;-. on its eastern #oundary< that Lot 25 did not lose nor !ain any area< that Lot 2= lost around s;- (hich (ere ho(ever !ained #y Lot 2>. ?n the #asis o% this survey, Ballatan -ade a (ritten de-and on +o to re-ove & dis-antle their i-'rove-ents on Lot No. 24. +o re%used, thus Ballatan #rou!ht the issue #e%ore the #aran!ay. +o did not a''ear. Ballatan led a case %or recovery o% 'ossession #e%ore the @6 o% "ala#on. he +o0s led an ans(er (ith third'arty co-'laint, i-'leadin! Li 6hin! 7ao, 7ao, AIA & En!r. ueddin!. he @6 decided in %avor o% Ballatan, orderin! +o to vacate Lot No. 24 and de-olish their i-'rove-ents and to 'ay Ballatan actual da-a!es. It also dis-issed the third'arty co-'laint a!ainst AIA, ueddin! & Li 6hin! 7ao. ?n a''eal, the 6A -odied the decision o% the @6. It ordered ordered Li 6hin! 7ao 7ao & En!r. ueddin! to 'ay Ballatan< and Li 6hin! 7ao to 'ay +o, a reasona#le a-ount %or that 'ortion o% the lot (hich they encroached the value to #e :ed at the ti-e o% tain!.
)ss-es0
1 Is the a(ard o% da-a!es 'ro'er, des'ite +o0s %ailure to s'eci%y the a-ount 'rayer %or & %ailure to 'ay the corres'ondin! additional lin! %ees thereonC 2 +iven the %act o% encroach-ent on Ballatan0s 'ro'erty, (hat are her ri!htsC R-ling0 1. 7ED, the a(ard o% da-a!es is 'ro'er. he third'arty co-'laint in the instant case arose %ro- the co-'laint o% accion 'u#liciana o% Ballatan a!ainst +o, (hich is a real action. In real actions, the docet & lin! %ees are #ased on the value o% 'ro'erty & the a-ount o% da-a!es clai-ed. *here the %ees 'rescri#ed %or the real action have #een 'aid, #ut the %ees o% certain related da-a!es are not, the court, althou!h havin! )urisdiction over the real action, -ay not have ac;uired )urisdiction over the acco-'anyin! clai- %or da-a!es. Accordin!ly, the court -ay e:'un!e those clai-s %or da-a!es, or allo( on -otion/ a reasona#le ti-e %or a-end-ent o% the co-'laint so as to alle!e the 'recise a-ount o% da-a!es & acce't 'ay-ent o% the re;uisite le!al %ees. In the instant case, the third'arty co-'laint sou!ht the sa-e re-edy as the 'rinci'al co-'laint, #ut added a 'rayer %or attorney0s %ees & costs (ithout s'eci%yin! their a-ounts. he additional lin! %ee on this clai- is dee-ed to constitute a lien on the )ud!-ent a(ard.
2. he erroneous survey #y En!r. ueddin! tri!!ered the discre'ancies. It (as u'on said erroneous survey that +o relied u'on in constructin! his house on his %ather0s land. ?ther(ise stated, +o had no no(led!e that they encroached on Ballatan0s lot. hey are dee-ed #uilders in !ood %aith. Li 6hin! 7ao #uilt his house on his lot #e%ore any o% the other 'arties did. here is no evidence, -uch less, any alle!ation that Li 6hin! 7ao (as a(are that (hen he #uilt his house he ne( that a 'ortion thereo% encroached on +o0s ad)oinin! land. +ood %aith is al(ays 'resu-ed, & u'on hi- (ho alle!es #ad %aith on the 'art o% a 'ossessor rests the #urden o% 'roo%. hus, Ballatan as o(ner o% Lot No. 24, -ay choose to 'urchase the i-'rove-ent -ade #y +o on their land, or sell to +o the su#)ect 'ortion. I% #uyin! the i-'rove-ent is i-'ractical as it -ay render +o0s house useless, then Ballatan -ay sell to +o that 'ortion o% Lot No. 24 on (hich their i-'rove-ent stands. I% the +o0s are un(illin! or una#le to #uy the lot, then they -ust vacate the land and, until they vacate, they -ust 'ay rent to Ballatan.
In the event that Ballatan elects to sell to +o the su#)ect 'ortion o% their lot, the 'rice -ust #e :ed at the 'revailain! -aret value at the ti-e o% 'ay-ent. he ti-e o% tain! is deter-inative o% )ust co-'ensation in e:'ro'riation 'roceedin!s< clearly the instant case is not one %or e:'ro'riation. Ballatan (as ordered to decide (ithin days (hether to #uy the 'ortion o% +o0s i-'rove-ent on Lot 24, or to sell to +o the 'ortion o% their land on (hich the i-'rove-ent stands. Engr. Quedding was ordered to pay attorney’s fees of P5,000 to Go.
