G.R. No. 164795 1.5.

Construction of a Guard House and gate at the 2nd Gate and reimburse the VTHA,
Inc. for the costs (sic) construction of a Guard House at 3rd gate;
TGN REALTY CORPORATION,, Petitioner,
vs. 1.6. Completion of all sidewalks;
VILLA TERESA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,, Respondent.
1.7. Development of the open space;
DECISION
1.8. Use of residential lots not for residential purposes (HAU) in clear violation of
BERSAMIN, J.: restrictions in the title;

This case concerns the dispute between the land developer and the residents of its 1.9. Plan of HAU to construct an overpass across Flora Ave.;
subdivision development regarding the state of improvements on the subdivision.
Having been declared by the forum of origin to have not completed the development of 1.10. Severe pruning of all Talisay trees along the perimeter of HAU resulting in the
the subdivision, and the declaration having been upheld on appeal, the land developer death of several trees. (These trees have been here for about 20 years now)
persists in urging the undoing of the decision promulgated on August 6, 2004, 1 whereby
the Court of Appeals (CA) denied its petition for review against the adverse ruling of the
Allegedly, VTHAI tried to discuss the complaints and demands but the petitioner failed
Office of the President (OP).
and refused to meet in evident disregard of the latter's obligations as the owner and
developer of the project.
Antecedents
In its letter dated September 22, 1997,3 the petitioner specifically answered the
Petitioner TGN Realty Corporation owned and developed starting on August 22, 1966 complaints and demands of VTHAI by explaining thusly:
the Villa Teresa Subdivision on a parcel of land situated in Barangays Sto. Rosario and
Cutcut, Angeles City, Pampanga. The project soon had many lot buyers who built or
1.1. Opening of Aureo St. and Flora Avenue
bought residential units thereon.
Aureo St. and a portion of Flora A venue have always been part and parcel of the Holy
Respondent Villa Teresa Homeowners Association, Inc. (VTHAI) was the association of
Angel University even before their construction and development of Villa Teresa
the residents and homeowners of the subdivision.
Subdivision. Said streets have long been turned-over to the University, and were never
opened to the public much less, the residents of Villa Teresa. Hence, for all legal intents
In a letter dated September 2, 1997,2 VTHAI, through counsel, made known to the and purposes, said streets are not part of the subdivision and are now under the control
petitioner the following complaints and demands, to wit: and supervision of the University.

1.1. Immediate opening of Aurea St. and the closed section of Flora Avenue; 1.2. Completion of Fencing

1.2. Completion of all fencing at the perimeter of Villa Teresa, including the perimeter The whole length of the perimeter fence, especially at the back portion, was already
fencing along property line from Gate #2 to Sto. Rosario (section of the Flora A venue) constructed prior to the Mt. Pinatubo eruption. It was only in 1992 that flash floods
which is being used, against the objection of the residents, as parking for vehicles which destroyed a small portion thereof, particularly the lots near the David's residence and
constricts the entry and exit to and from the subdivision; Marissa Drive opposite Villa Dolores Subdivision.

1.3. Closure of all openings at the perimeter fence (Pritil gate); Fencing the entrance of Flora Avenue fronting the Jimenez property is a foolish and
vindictive way of solving the alleged constricted entry and exit. It will do more harm
1.4. Construction of adequate drainage at Ma. Cristina and along Flora Avenue: than good, and result in a legal, if not social and political problem. At most, this is a
temporary inconvenience which poses no serious problem.
3. Closure of Openings (Pritil Gate) 8. Use of Residential Lots for Other Purposes

Pritil Gate serves as an emergency entry/exit to the subdivision, and is not supposed to There was no violation of the restrictions when T.G.N. Realty donated the whole Block
be fenced by a concrete wall. Moreover, the adjacent landowner, Rafael Nunag, has No. 5 to the Holy Angel University, which is now the site of the school gym. This is a
threatened to close all our drainage lines passing through his property before it drains prerogative of the T.G.N. as the owner. Besides, a careful perusal of the titles would
to the nearby Matua Creek, if this gate will be fenced. If this happens, water from the readily show that these lots are for educational, and not residential purposes.
upper portion of the subdivision will overflow from the manholes and catch basins, and
will flood low lying streets like Aurora Drive and Flora Avenue. 9. Plan of HAU to Construct Overpass

  We suggest that you direct your request to the school administration as the proper
party.
4. Construction of Adequate Drainage
10. Pruning of Trees
The drainage system designed by Engr. Victor Valencia along Cristina Drive and Flora A
venue has been functioning effectively for thirty (30) years. It was only recently that T.G.N. Realty has nothing to do with the pruning of Talisay trees around the perimeter
manholes on low portions of Cristina Drive are slow in absorbing the unusual amount of of Holy Angel University. However, T.G.N. was informed that the matter has been
rain water, but takes only about an hour to fully drain. properly explained to VTHA by the school authorities and that 75 new Mahogany trees
were planted to eventually replace 47 live and 14 dead trees.
5. Construction of Guard House
The truth of the matter is that about two years ago, our client had already dealt with the
A guard house was constructed at the Flora A venue exit, but was transferred by VTHA. present officers of VTHA on the control, supervision and maintenance of these facilities,
As far as reimbursement of costs of guard house at Don Juan Nepomuceno Avenue is and in fact, a Memorandum of Agreement was prepared for signing by the parties.
concerned, T.G.N. Realty has never agreed to reimburse the same, nor does it intend to. Among the many conditions that VTHA voluntarily agreed to undertake was payment of
realty tax on the road lots and open space, and maintenance and repair of all facilities in
6. Completion of Sidewalks the subdivision. A verification with the Office of the City Treasurer, however, revealed
that VTI-TA has been delinquent in the payment of taxes for the past two years.
All sidewalks of the subdivision were constructed except that portion of Flora A venue
along the open space, because it was leveled by heavy equipments contracted by the xxxx
VTHA. The gutter along the full frontage of the open space is halved or low, and used by
residents as parking for their vehicles. If you will observe, very few people use the In view of the failure and refusal of the petitioner to heed its demands, VTHAI filed with
sidewalks, especially in this part of the subdivision. the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (BLURB) its complaint for specific
performance and for violation of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 957 and P.D. No. 1216
7. Development of the Open Space on October 17, 1997, docketed as HLURB Case No. REM-C0-03-7-1133.4

Records will show that T.G.N Realty did not advertise nor commit to develop the open On December 10, l 997, the petitioner filed its answer with counterclaim,5 whereby it
space when it opened the subdivision and sold the lots therein. It was never its intention reiterated the explanations contained in its letter dated September 22, 1997, and urged
to put up amenities/facilities that some residents are expecting. It may be recalled that that the complaint be dismissed. It insisted that it should be granted moral damages of
T.G.N. Realty provided several playground equipments in the provisional playground ₱l00,000.00 for discrediting its goodwill, and attorney's fees of ₱30,000.00 plus
near the Teresa water tank. However, children from nearby barangay Cutcut would ₱2,000.00/appearance per hearing because the complaint was malicious.
climb the fence and play at the park, to the dismay of some residents. Hence, the former
officers at VTHA requested T.G.N. Realty to remove these playground equipments and it On September 25, 1998, HLURB Arbiter Jose A. Atencio, Jr. rendered his
was agreed that the same be donated to Barangay Cutcut. decision,6 relevantly holding and ruling thusly:
To verify the status of development in the subdivision an ocular inspection was 1.1. Respondent has violated PD 957, otherwise known as subdivision lot and
conducted on March 13, 1998, and the findings revealed among others that: condominium unit buyer protective decree and PD 1216, the law defining open
space in a subdivision,
Background:
1.2. The parties are liable for damages and the payments of administrative
Villa Teresa Subdivision is a first class subdivision... fines, insofar as the respondent is concerned.

Development Description: As to the first issue.

Road Network: Per approved plan all roads will be paved with concrete ... the Aurea and A perusal of the evidence presented, records of the subdivision, as well as the facts and
Flora Ave., which is (sic) near the Holy Angel University is (sic) closed to the subdivision circumstances obtaining in the case, it cannot be denied that respondent violated
residents and allegedly appropriated by the school. Section 22 of PD 957 when it allowed Flora A venue and Aurea Street which are part of
the subdivision to be closed and exclusively appropriated for the use of Holy Angel
University.
Curbs, Gutters and sidewalk: The curb, gutters and sidewalks were not yet fully
completed specially at the side of the open space.
It likewise violated the same Section when it caused the construction of a gate (Pritil) as
the same is part of the perimeter fence of the subdivision,
Drainage System: ... Per inspection the subdivision drainage were completed but the
canal at the Cristina Ave. were (sic) clogging and the road and some houses were
submerged with 1-2 feet of water during rainy season as alleged by the residents at the The transfer of the whole Block 5 under the name of Holy University (sic) and its
site. Because the flow of water coming from the Holy Angel University cannot be subsequent conversion into a compound of the said school is an alteration in violation of
accommodated in the canal, that's why it goes to the road (sic). the above-mentioned Section of PD 957.

Electrical installation: ... were already completed. Said Section 22 of PD 957 states that:

Water System: ... will be provided by a centralized water system. Installation of water Section 22. Alteration of Plans - No owner or developer shall change or alter roads, open
pipe (sic) were already completed. space, infrastructures, facilities for public use and/or other form of subdivision
developments as contained in the approved subdivision plan and/or represented in its
advertisements, without the permission of the Authority (now this Board) and the
Open Space: The designated open space is already operational and a clubhouse is
written conformity or consent of the duly organized homeowners association or in the
already constructed with a basketball (sic) (which) is on-going construction including the
absence of the latter by the majority of the lot buyers in the subdivision. (Underscoring
guardhouses and the name of the subdivision (sic). As stated by the members and
ours).
officer of the association, construction of the basketball court, clubhouse and the name
of the subdivision is funded by the Homeowners Assn.
And Section 33 of the said decree provides as follows:
Recommendation: Proper development and maintenance of all subdivision facilities
should be undertaken by the owner/developer. And fencing of unfinished perimeter "Section 33. Nullity of waivers - Any condition, stipulation or provision in a contract of
fence especially those leading to the squatter area. Cleaning of clogging canal and help Sale whereby any person waives, compliance with any provisions of this Decree or of
the association in maintaining the subdivision a safe, clean and healthy place to live in any rule or regulation issues thereunder shall be void."
(are) the request of the residents.
The planned construction of an overpass across Flora Avenue without complying with
Based on the allegations in the pleadings and the position papers of the parties the the requirements above-cited is likewise illegal.
issues to be resolved are whether or not:
Let us now discuss the development and/or construction of the common facilities of the
subdivision.
It cannot be denied that the respondent is obliged to complete the construction of the 4. Construct and maintain adequate drainage at Ma. Cristina Drive and along
roads drainage and perimeter fence and "... other forms of development represented or Flora Ave.
promised in the brochures. advertisement and other sales propaganda, disseminated by
the owner or developer or his agents and the same shall form part of the sales warrants 5. Construct and maintain all sidewalks, roads and gutters as well as the
enforceable against said owner or developer, jointly and severally. Failure to comply (maintenance of) open space
with these warranties shall be punishable in accordance with the penalties provided for
in this Decree." (Section 19, PD 957).
6. Cease and desist from using residential lots for non-residential purposes
until the requirements of Section 22 of PD 957 shall have been complied with.
Respondent is oblige (sic) to construct and maintain the subdivision facilities until
proper donation to the city is made. There is no clear proof however that respondent
7. Cease and desist from constructing or allowing to be constructed an
shall construct a guard house at Don Nepomuceno Ave., or reimburse complainant of
overpass across Flora A venue or any portion of the subdivision until the
the cost of its construction.
requirements of Section 22 of PD 957 shall have been complied with.

Maintenance by the respondent is still required despite of its alleged donation of the
8. Cease and Desist from pruning trees, particularly the Talisay trees along the
roads of the subdivision of the City of Angeles because the respondent failed to secure
perimeter of HAU until the necessary permits have been acquired from the
the required Certificate of Completion (COC) as mandated by Rule IV, Section 9 1st Par.
appropriate government agency.
of the implementing rules and regulations of P.D. 1216.
9. Pay an administrative fine of ₱10,000.00 to this Board for violating Sections
"Section 9 Effects. One the registered owner or developer has secured the Certificate of
19 and 22 of PD 957.
Completion and has executed a Deed of Donation of road lots and open spaces, he/she
shall be deemed relieved of the responsibility of maintaining the roadlots and open
space of the subdivision notwithstanding the refusal of the City/Municipality concerned 10. Pay actual damages in the amount of ₱30,000.00
to accept the donation."
11. Pay attorney's fees in the amount of ₱10,000.00 Failure to comply as
Road lots shall include road, sidewalks, alleys and planting strips and its gutters, ordered shall compel this Board to endorse the case to the Provincial
drainage and sewerage. (Section 4(d), supra.) Prosecutor for the filing of appropriate criminal case.

As to the second issue. Due to the contained failure and refusal of the respondent to SO ORDERED.
comply with the just and valid demands of the complainant compelling them to hire a
lawyer to enforce its rights respondent is liable for the payment of actual damages and By petition for review,7 the petitioner elevated the adverse decision to the Board of
attorneys fees. Commissioners of the HLURB (docketed as HLURB Case No. REM-A-990210-0039) based
on the following grounds:8
Likewise, for violating the provisions of PD 957, under Section 38 of the Decree
respondent is also liable for administrative fine. 1.1 That the Honorable Hearing Officer committed grave abuse of discretion
when it declared the petitioner has violated provisions of PD 957;
PREMISES considered it is ordered that the respondent shall immediately:
1.2. The Honorable Hearing Officer committed errors in the findings of facts
1. Open Aureo St. and the closed Section of Flora Avenue. and in conclusions in law when it found the petitioner liable for pruning trees
and closing streets and finding that there was no completion yet of the fence
and the roads and alleys, and ordering the petitioner to maintain the roads; for
2. Complete the perimeter fence of the subdivision
attributing to it a cease and desist order from constructing an overpass;

3. Close all opening at the perimeter fence (Pritil Gate)

 1.3. The Honorable Hearing officer committed grave abuse of discretion when On July 29, 2003, the petitioner moved for reconsideration "on the ground of grave
it ordered the petitioner to pay ₱30,000.00 as and by way of actual damages. abuse of discretion in merely adopting the findings of facts and conclusions of law of the
HLURB decision which amounts to excess of jurisdiction and if not corrected would
On September 3, 1999, the Board of Commissioners of the HLURB affirmed the HLURB cause irreparable damage upon the petitioner-appellant." 14
arbiter with modification,9 viz.: 10
The OP denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration on September 10,
WHEREFORE, the decision of the Office below dated September 25, 1998 is hereby 2003, 15 stating:
MODIFIED by deleting the directive to pay actual damages, and in lieu thereof, a new
directive is hereby entered as follows: This refers to the motion of TGN Realty Corporation (TGN) seeking reconsideration of
the Decision of this Office dated June 19, 2003, and accordingly prays for the dismissal
"10. Pay to the complainant the sum of ₱15,000.00 as moderate damages." of the complaint of the private respondent-appellee.

All other aspects of the decision dated September 25, 1998 are hereby AFFIRMED. It will be recalled that this Office, in the assailed Decision, dismissed TGN's appeal from
the decision of the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board and affirmed in toto  the
findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the HLURB decisions. Movant argues
SO ORDERED.
that there was a grave abuse of discretion in merely adopting the findings of facts and
conclusions of law of the HLURB decision which amounts to excess of jurisdiction and if
Ruling of the OP not corrected would cause irreparable damage upon the petitioner-appellant.

On October 25, 1999, the petitioner appealed the adverse decision to the OP (docketed Upon due consideration, this Office finds no cogent reason to disturb its earlier Decision.
as OP Case No. 20-A-8933) on "grounds of errors in the finding of facts and appreciation We have carefully reviewed the arguments raised in the instant motion and find the
of evidence and, grave abuse of discretion." 11 same to be a mere reiteration of matters previously considered and found to be without
merit in the assailed decision. A motion for reconsideration which does not make
On June 19, 2003, however, the OP, through Sr. Deputy Executive Secretary Waldo Q. out "any new matter sufficiently persuasive to induce modification of' judgment will be
Flores, ruled thusly: 12 denied"  (Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank vs. Escolin, 67 SCRA 202).

This resolves the appeal filed by petitioner-appellant from the Decision of the Board of WHEREFORE, premises considered, the motion for reconsideration is hereby DENIED.
Commissioners Second Division, Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board dated
September 3, 1999, affirming in toto  the Decision of the Housing and Land Use Arbiter, SO ORDERED.
Atty. Emmanuel T. Pontejos, dated June 23, 1998. 13
Decision of the CA
After a careful and thorough evaluation and study of the records of this case, this Office
hereby adopts by reference the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the
The petitioner then appealed to the CA (CA-G.R. SP No. 79506), urging the review and
HLURB decisions.
reversal of the OP' s decision on the "ground that there are serious errors in the findings
of facts and grave abuse of discretion in the assailed Decision and Order which if not
A copy of the said HLURB Decision is attached hereto as Annex '"A". corrected would cause irreparable damage and cause grave legal consequences for the
petitioner." 16
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED in
toto. As mentioned, the CA promulgated its assailed decision on August 6, 2004, affirming the
OP. 17
SO ORDERED.
Hence, this appeal by petition for review on certiorari.
It is significant to note that even before the Court could act on the petition for review The petitioner submitted its reply to the comment and opposition on February 24,
on certiorari,  the petitioner filed a manifestation on October 6, 2004, 18 stating that "in a 2005,27 its reply to comment on March 4, 2005,28 and its compliance with the January
certificate of completion dated 28 September 2004, the Housing and Land Use 24, 2005 resolution on March 16, 2005.29
Regulatory Board ("HLURB") has duly certified that upon inspection, the subdivision
project of the instant case has been completed in accordance with the approved In the meantime, on April 11, 2005, the petitioner submitted its manifestation to the
development plan." The petitioner wanted the Court to appreciate the fact that the effect that in the compliance dated March 4, 2005, Atty. Cusi clarified that it was his
project had been completed, thereby rendering the demands of VTHAI ventilated in the entire law firm that was withdrawing its appearance as counsel.30
HLURB as "bereft of any basis in fact and in law." 19 It prayed that the Court should take
note of the manifestation, and consider the Ce1iificate of Completion as part of the
On June 22, 2005, the Court resolved to: (1) note the manifestation of the Villanueva De
records of the case, and to render judgment nullifying the adverse decision of the CA
Leon Hipolito Law Offices that it had already complied with the resolution of January 24,
and to direct the dismissal of the complaint filed by VTI-IAI against it (HLURB Case No.
2005; (2) deny the petitioner's motion to strike VTHAI' s comment on the petition for
REM-C0-03-7- 1133).
review on certiorari  and counter-manifestation; and (3) note VTHAI' s opposition to the
motion to strike of the petitioner.31
On November 1 7, 2004, the Comi required VTHAI to comment on the petition for
review on certiorari  (not to file a motion to dismiss); and noted the petitioner's
On August 30, 2005, the petitioner filed a motion for leave and to admit32 its reply to
manifestation dated October 6, 2004.20
comment.33 On October 17, 2005, the Court denied the petitioner's motion for leave and
to admit, noted without action the reply to comment "in view of the denial of the
On December 29, 2004, VTHAI filed its comment 21 and a counter-manifestation, 22 both motion to file the same and considering that it would in effect be a second reply as
of which were petitioner's earlier reply dated March 4, 2005 had been noted in the resolution of April
25, 2005."34
noted on January 24, 2005.23
Issues
On January 12, 2005, the petitioner moved to strike the comment and counter-
manifestation,24 alleging that such filings were in gross violation of Section 11, Rule 13 of The petitioner raises the following issues,35 namely:
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure;  and that although VTHAI asserted that no inspection
had been conducted by the BLURB Regional Office, it did not dispute the genuineness of
(a)
the Certificate of Completion.
THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT FAILED TO ORDER
On February l 0, 2005, VTHAI opposed the petitioner's motion to strike,25 countering
THE DISMISSAL OF THE SUBJECT COMPLIANT (sic) DESPITE THE CLEAR SHOWING THAT
that the requisite written explanations and affidavits of service had appeared on page 25
THE SAID COMPLAINT IS BEREFT OF ANY FACTUAL AND/OR LEGAL BASIS
of its comment and on page 5 of its counter-manifestation, respectively. VTHAI stressed
that no inspection had been conducted by the BLURB Regional Office; that the approved
subdivision plan had not been completed; and that the petitioner had not yet complied (b)
with the decision of the BLURB Regional Office as of the time of its filing of the
opposition to the motion to strike. THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT SIMPLY AFFIRMED
THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT DESPITE THE FACT THAT
On March 2, 2005,26 the Court held in abeyance its action on: (1) the petitioner's motion THE SAME WERE ISSUED WITHOUT EVEN EXPLAINING THE FACTS AND LAW UPON
to strike; and (2) VTHAI's comment on and opposition to the petitioner's motion to WHICH THE SAME WERE BASED.
strike. It reiterated the resolution of January 24, 2005 requiring the petitioner to submit
proof of authority of Juan S. Nepomuceno to sign the conforme  and to clarify if it was (c)
only Atty. Lester Cusi or the entire law firm who was withdrawing appearance as
counsel. THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED WHEN IT REFUSED TO ORDER THE DISMISSAL
OF THE COMPLAINT FILED UNDER HLURB CASE NO. REM-C0-03-7-1133 DESPITE THE
FACT THAT THE SAME DID NOT CONTAIN A CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING.
 (d) conjectures; (2) when the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd, or impossible;
(3) when there is grave abuse of discretion; (4) when the judgment is based on a
THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED WHEN IT REFUSED TO ORDER THE DISMISSAL misapprehension of facts; (5) when the findings of facts are conflicting; (6) when in
OF THE COMPLAINT FILED UNDER HLURB CASE NO. REM-C0-03-7-1133 DESPITE THE making its findings the CA went beyond the issues of the case, or its findings are
FACT THAT THE SAME WAS FILED WITHOUT ANY AUTHORITY FROM HEREIN contrary to the admissions of both the appellant and the appellee; (7) when the CA' s
RESPONDENT. findings are contrary to those by the trial court; (8) when the findings are conclusions
without citation of specific evidence on which they are based; (9) when the facts set
forth in the petition as well as in the petitioner's main and reply briefs are not disputed
Ruling of the Court
by the respondent; (10) when the findings of fact are premised on the supposed
absence of evidence and contradicted by the evidence on record; or (11) when the CA
The petition for review on certiorari  is granted. manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by the parties, which, if
properly considered, would justify a different conclusion.38
The issues being raised by the petitioner - that VTHAI did not cite any basis for its
demands; that VTHAI did not present any evidence to show that the approved Yet, none of the foregoing exceptions to the limitation applies to this case. As a
subdivision plan required its demands; that VTHAI did not establish that the petitioner consequence it seems foregone that the Court would be justified in now rejecting the
had violated Section 22 of P.D. No. 957; that VTHAI did not present evidence proving appeal of the petitioner, and in upholding the CA adversely against the petitioner.
that the petitioner was the party responsible for the acts being attributed to it, like the
closure of Aureo Street and a section of Flora A venue, the use of residential lots for
But the attention of the Court has been directed to the conflict in the findings on the
other purposes, the proposed construction of an overpass, and the pruning of Talisay
state of the development of the project.
trees along the perimeter of the Holy Angel University; and that the petitioner had not
complied with its obligations to complete the development of the project - are
essentially factual in nature Ordinarily, the appeal by petition for review According to the decision dated September 25, 1998 of the HLURB arbiter, an ocular
on certiorari  should not involve the consideration and resolution of factual issues. inspection of the premises was conducted on March 13, 1998 in order to verify the
Section I, Rule 45 of the Rules of Court  limits the appeal to questions of law because the status of the development of the project. It was found at the time that ''proper
Court, not being a trier of facts, should not be expected to re-evaluate the sufficiency of development and maintenance of all subdivision facilities should be undertaken by the
the evidence introduced in the fora below.36 For this purpose, the distinction between a owner/developer. And fencing of unfinished perimeter fence especially those leading to
question of law and a question of fact is well defined. In Century Iron Works, Inc. v. the squatter area. Cleaning of clogging canal and help the association in maintaining the
Banas,37 this Court has stated: subdivision a safe, clean and healthy place to live in (are) the requests of the
residents."  Being the agency that has acquired the expertise on the matter in question,
the HLURB' s findings should be respected. 39
A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what the law is on a certain state of
facts, while there is a question of fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsity of
the alleged facts. For a question to be one of law, the question must not involve an As adverted to earlier, however, the Regional Office of the HLURB meanwhile issued the
examination of the probative value of the evidence presented by the litigants or any or Certificate of Completion dated September 28, 2004 stating that "upon inspection, the
them. The resolution of the issue must rest solely on what the law provides on the given subdivision project of the instant case has been completed in accordance with the
set of circumstances. Once it is clear that the issue invites a review of the evidence approved development plan."40 The Certificate of Completion is reproduced in full
presented, the question posed is one of fact. hereinbelow:

Thus, the test of whether a question is one of law or of fact is not the appellation given CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
to such question by the party raising the same; rather, it is whether the appellate court
can determine the issue raised without reviewing or evaluating the evidence, in which Name of Project : VILLA TERESA SUBDIVISION
case, it is a question of law; otherwise it is a question of fact.

Location : Sto. Rosario; Cutcut, Angeles City

There may be exceptions to the limitation of the review to question of law, such as the
following: (1) when the findings are grounded entirely on speculation, surmises, or
 Owner : Peter G. Nepomoceno/T.G.N. Realty Corp. developer of a subdivision shall provide adequate roads, alleys and sidewalks. For
subdivision projects one (1) hectare or more, the owner or developer shall reserve thirty
percent (30%) of the gross area for open space. such open space shall have the following
Project Classification : PD 957 standards allocated exclusively for parks, playgrounds and recreational use:

CR No./Date Issued : RS-056/July 14, 1977 (a) 9% of gross area for high density or social housing (66 to 100 family lot per
gross hectare).
LS No./Date Issued : LS-0514/July 14, 1977
(b) 7% of gross area for medium-density or economic housing (21 to 65 family
Area No. of Lots : 637,335 square meter lot per gross hectare).

(c) 3.5 % of gross area low-density or open market housing (20 family lots and
BE IT KNOWN that the above-described project upon inspection has been completed in below per gross hectare).
accordance with the approved development plan. Accordingly, upon recommendation
of the Inspection Team, said project is hereby certified as completed. These areas reserved for parks, playgrounds and recreational use shall be non-alienable
public lands, and non-buildable. The plans of the subdivision project shall include tree
Let it be known further that this office interposes no objection to the donation/turn over planting on such parts of the subdivision as may be designated by the Authority.
of the facilities of the said subdivision project to the Local Government of Angeles City.
Upon their completion as certified to by the Authority, the roads, alleys, sidewalks and
playgrounds shall be donated by the owner or developer to the city or municipality
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and it shall be mandatory for the local governments to accept provided, however, that
and the seal of this Board to be affixed at San Fernando the parks and playgrounds may be donated to the Homeowners Association of the
City, Pampanga this 28111 Day of September 2004. project with the consent of the city or municipality concerned. No portion of the parks
and playgrounds donated thereafter shall he converted to any other purpose or
(signed) purposes. (Bold emphasis supplied)
EDITHA U. BARRAMEDA
Regional Officer 41 In this connection, the last paragraph of the Certificate of Completion issued by the
HLURB Regional Office reflected as follows:

A certificate of completion certifies that a subdivision project has been completed in Let it be known further that this Office interposes no objection to the donation/
accordance with the approved development plan. This is clear from Section 8 of turnover of the facilities of the said subdivision project to the Local Government of
the Rules Implementing Presidential Decree No. 953, pursuant to Article IV, Section 51of Angeles City.
Executive Order No. 648,  to wit:
We note, too, that under Section 9 of the Rules and Regulations Implementing
Section 8. ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION - No Certificate of Completion Presidential Decree No. 957, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1216,  the registered
(COC) shall be issued by the HLRB unless the subdivision owner/developer complies with owner or developer of the subdivision who has secured the certificate of completion
the provisions of these Rules and Regulations. and has executed the deed of donation in favor of the city or municipality "shall be
deemed relieved of the responsibility of maintaining the road lots and open space of the
The Certificate of Completion dated September 28, 2004, being the issuance of the subdivision notwithstanding the refusal of [the] City/Municipality concerned to accept
HLURB itself, cannot be ignored. Its significance derives from the law itself. the donation."  Moreover, Section 1 (2) of Presidential Decree No. 95343 specifically
states: "(E)very owner of an existing subdivision shall plant trees in the open spaces
required to be reserved for the common use and enjoyment of the owners of the lots
Section 31 of Presidential Decree No. 957, as amended by Presidential Decree No.
therein as well as along all roads and service streets. The subdivision owner shall consult
1216,42 reads: Section 31. Roads, Alleys, Sidewalks and Open spaces. The owner as
the Bureau of Forest Development as to the appropriate species of trees to be planted the approved development plan for its Villa Teresa Subdivision situated in Sto. Rosario,
and the manner of planting them." Cutcut, Angeles City.

The obvious conflict between, on the one hand, the earlier findings made by the HLURB No pronouncement on costs of suit.
arbiter that undoubtedly became the basis for the HLURB Board of Commissioners, the
OP and the CA to successively rule adversely against the petitioner, and, on the other, SO ORDERED.
the recitals to the contrary of the Certificate of Completion issued by the Regional
Officer of the HLURB must not be ignored. Justice demands that the conflict be resolved
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN,
and settled especially considering that the findings and the Certificate of Completion
Associate Justice
were both issued by the HLURB itself, through its agents.
WE CONCUR:
The resolution and settlement of the conflict require the evaluation and re-evaluation of
factual matters. Yet, the Court cannot itself resolve and settle the conflict in this appeal
because it is not a trier of facts. Moreover, the proper resolution and just settlement of PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
the conflict will probably require the conduct of a hearing to be conducted by an official Associate Justice
or office with the competence to determine the factual dispute involved. That office is Chairperson
the HLURB, the agency of the Government in which the expertise to monitor the
completion of subdivision projects has been lodged by law. A remand to the HLURB BIENVENIDO L. REYES FRANCIS H. JARDELEZA
becomes necessary, therefore, in order that an objective but full inquiry into the level of Associate Justice Associate Justice
completion of the improvements in the project can be assured.

The expertise and competence of the HLURB for the purpose has been aptly expounded NOEL G. TIJAM
in Peralta v. De Leon,44 citing Maria Luisa Park Association, Inc. v. Almendras,45 viz.: Associate Justice

The provisions of P.O. No. 957 were intended to encompass all questions regarding ATTESTATION
subdivisions and condominiums. The intention was aimed at providing for an
appropriate govermnent agency, the HLURB, to which all parties aggrieved in the I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation
implementation of provisions and the enforcement of contractual rights with respect to before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.
said category of real estate may take recourse. The business of developing subdivisions
and corporations being imbued with public interest and welfare, any question arising PRESBITERO J. VEALSACO, JR.
from the exercise of that prerogative should be brought to the HLURB which has the Associate Justice
technical know-how on the matter. In the exercise of its powers, the BLURB must Chairperson, Third Division
commonly interpret and apply contracts and determine the rights of private parties
under such contracts. This ancillary power is no longer a uniquely judicial function, CERTIFICATION
exercisable only by the regular courts.
Pursuant to the Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution and the Division Chairperson’s
In view of the foregoing, the Court sees no need to dwell at length on and resolve the Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in
remaining issues submitted for consideration. consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s
Division.
WHEREFORE, the Court SETSASIDE the decision promulgated by the Court of Appeals on
August 6, 2004; and ORDERS the remand of this case (HLURB Case No. REM-C0-03- 7- MARIA LOURDES P.A. SERENO
1133) to the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board for further proceedings, Chief Justice
particularly to determine whether or not the petitioner had already fully complied with