Cabrera v. Court of Appeals, 195 SCRA 314 (Digested Case)

Re: Closure and opening of roads thru an ordinance (Sec. 21)

FACTS: The Provincial Board of Catanduanes adopted Resolution to close the old road leading to the new Capitol Building of their province and to give to the owners of the properties traversed by the new road equal area as per survey by the Highway District Engineer's office from the old road adjacent to the respective remaining portion of their properties. Pursuant to a deed of exchange authorized by the Provincial Governor of Catanduanes, the exchange of properties took place. Herein petitioner, filed a petition for "Restoration of Public Road and/or Abatement of Nuisance, Annulment of Resolutions and Documents with Damages." He alleged that the land fronting his house was a public road owned by the Province of Catanduanes in its governmental capacity and therefore beyond the commerce of man. He contended that Resolution No. 158 and the deeds of exchange were invalid, as so too was the closure of the northern portion of the said road. The CA held that pursuant to Republic Act No. 5185, municipal authorities can close, subject to the approval or direction of the Provincial Board, thoroughfares under Section 2246 of the Revised Administrative Code. Although in this case the road was not closed by the municipality of Catanduanes but by the provincial board of Catanduanes, the closure, nevertheless, is valid since it was ordered by the approving authority itself. However, while it could do so, the provincial government of Catanduanes could close the road only if the persons prejudiced thereby were indemnified, Section 2246 of the Revised Administrative Code being very explicit on this. Before us now, the petitioner insists that Sec. 2246 is not applicable because the resolution is not an order for the closure of the road in question but an authority to barter or exchange it with private properties. He maintains that the public road was owned by the province in its governmental capacity and, without a prior order of closure, could not be the subject of a barter. Control over public roads, he insists, is with Congress and not with the provincial board

ISSUES: 

(1) WON the resolution is valid. 

(2) WON the municipal, and not the provincial board has the authority to issue such resolution.

(3) WON the petitioner has sustained injuries and therefore should be indemnified.

HELD:

(1) Yes. The authority of the provincial board to close that road and use or convey it for other purposes is derived from the provisions of RA 5185 in relation to Section 2246 of the Revised Administrative Code. Property thus withdrawn from public servitude may be used or conveyed for any purpose for which other real property belonging to the municipality might be lawfully used or conveyed. 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.

(2) No. There is no reason for not applying the doctrine announced in Favis to the provincial board in connection with the closure of provincial roads. The provincial board has, after all, the duty of maintaining such roads for the comfort and convenience of the inhabitants of the province. Moreover, this authority is inferable from the grant by the national legislature of the funds to the Province of Catanduanes for the construction of provincial roads.

(3) No. The general rule is that one whose property does not abut on the closed section of a street has no right to compensation for the closing or vacation of the street, if he still has reasonable access to the general system of streets. The circumstances in some cases may be such as to give a right to damages to a property owner, even though his property does not abut on the closed section. But to warrant recovery in any such case the property owner must show that the situation is such that he has sustained special damages differing in kind, and not merely in degree, from those sustained by the public generally. Here, the petitioners failed to adduce evidence that he indeed sustained injuries. (Damnum absque injuria)