CA junks case vs. Lapu-Lapu City

CEBU, Philippines - The Court of Appeals has dismissed the petition filed by the heirs of Mamerto Ingjug seeking monetary settlement from the Lapu-Lapu City Government for a parcel of land that has allegedly been used as playground of a public school for about two decades already.

Associate Justice Victoria Isabel Paredes denied the petition for recovery of ownership, possession and partition against the City Government saying the heirs did not offer evidence to warrant their claims.

“Aside from their bare allegations and self-serving letters to respondent City, no proof was presented to show that there was a meeting of the minds on the settlement and the terms thereof,” Paredes said.

The heirs of Ingjug were Bartolome Escabas, Alfredo Escabas and Modesta Escabas-Nabua who claimed that sometime in 2002, respondent through lawyer Vincent Joseph Lim, verbally promised to give them financial assistance as settlement of the case pending before the court regarding the legal ownership of the lot which served as the playground of Suba Basbas Elementary School.

Paredes however said “allegations are not proof.”

“Assuming respondent made overtures and promises for settlement, such acts are not illegal or actionable because amicable settlements are not proscribed but are rather encouraged,” she ruled.

The petitioners claimed that the City Government committed extrinsic fraud for the failure to fulfill its promise to give them financial aid in exchange for the lot used by the public school.

The heirs filed a petition before the CA against the City Government after their claimed was denied by the Regional Trial Court Branch 53 in Lapu-Lapu City.

The case stemmed after the petitioners discovered in 1991 that the public school is utilizing the lot which they inherited from their grandfather, Ingjug, and was used as school playground without their knowledge and consent.

Petitioners said while the case was still pending in court, respondent through counsel verbally promised to give financial assistance.

However, when they made a series of follow-ups, they were always told that the City lacks available funds.

In March this year, petitioners said Assistant City Attorney Roldan Pepito promised them anew of the settlement price. However, the assurance that the funds will be available by April remained unfulfilled.

Paredes ruled “the record is bereft of any showing that respondent City made a promise to settle with petitioners. Courts cannot constitute themselves guardians of persons who are not legally incompetent. Courts operate not because one person has been defeated or overcome by another, but because he has been defeated or overcome illegally.”

Paredes said the court can only intervene if there was a violation of law.  (FREEMAN)