Case Digest: MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY v. BENJAMIN TUDTUD, et al. 571 SCRA 165 (2008)

MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY v. BENJAMIN TUDTUD, et al. 571 SCRA 165 (2008)

The National Airports Corporation (NAC) filed a complaint for expropriation in order to expand the Cebu Lahug Airport. It sought to acquire, by negotiated sale or expropriation, several lots adjoining the then existing airport which included the parcels of land owned by the predecessors-in- interest of respondents Benjamin Tudtud et al. NAC assured the owners that they would reacquire the land if it is no longer needed by the airport. The Court of First Instance of Cebu granted the expropriation. No structures related to the operation of the Cebu Lahug Airport were constructed on the land expropriated. Respondent Lydia Adlawan (Lydia), acting as attorney-in-fact of the original owners, sent a letter to the general manager of the petitioner Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA), the new owner of the lot and demanded to repurchase the lot at the same price paid at the time of the taking, without interest. Lydia filed a complaint before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu City for reconveyance and damages against the MCIAA. The RTC of Cebu rendered judgment in favor of Tudtud et al. MCIAA appealed to the Court of Appeals but it affirmed the RTC decision. MCIAA then filed a Motion for Reconsideration but was denied.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Tudtud et al. are entitled for the re-conveyance of the land expropriated

HELD:

Tudtud et al.’s witness respondent Justiniano Borga declared that the original owners did not oppose the expropriation of the lot upon the assurance of the NAC that they would reacquire it if it is no longer needed by the airport. The rights and duties between the MCIAA and Tudtud et al are governed by Article 1190 of the Civil Code which provides: When the conditions have for their purpose the extinguishment of an obligation to give, the parties, upon the fulfillment of said conditions, shall return to each other what they have received. In case of the loss, deterioration, or improvement of the thing, the provisions which, with respect to the debtor, are laid down in the preceding article [Article 1189] shall be applied to the party who is bound to return. While the MCIAA is obliged to re-convey Lot No. 988 to Tudtud et al., they must return to the MCIAA what they received as just compensation for the expropriation of Lot No. 988, plus legal interest to be computed from default, which in this case runs from the time the MCIAA complies with its obligation to the respondents. Tudtud et al., must likewise pay the MCIAA the necessary expenses it may have incurred in sustaining Lot No. 988 and the monetary value of its services in managing it to the extent that Tudtud et al., were benefited thereby. Following Article 1187 of the Civil Code, the MCIAA may keep whatever income or fruits it may have obtained from Lot No. 988, and Tudtud et al., need not account for the interests that the amounts they received as just compensation may have earned in the meantime.