Court orders demolition of 55 houses at NRA

CEBU, Philippines - The court ordered the demolition of at least 55 houses on J. de Veyra St., North Reclamation Area in Cebu City after the occupants failed to voluntarily vacate their houses.

Lawyer Nicole Marie Cimafranca-Go, branch clerk of court of Regional Trial Court Branch 7 directed Sheriff Eugene Fuentes Jr. to implement the writ of demolition.

The order stemmed from the complaint filed by Domingo Garcia, the owner of the lot.

Garcia, in his complaint, said that at first, he tolerated a few of the occupants of the lot although there was no consent from him.

But because the occupants grew bigger, he was forced to exercise his rights as owner and demanded them to vacate but failed.

Garcia then decide to ask the court to direct the defendants to pay a monthly rental of P300 each from March 3, 2008, P200 each per month for exemplary damages, P500 each for attorney's fee and not less than P10,000 for litigation expenses.

The case was submitted for mediation.

Garcia and the occupants arrived at a compromise agreement in 2009, which was approved by Judge Simeon Dumdum.

Garcia agreed to pay P110,000 through the homeowners group president, Bernardino Tuico, while the occupants promised to vacate the lot on or before May 15, 2010.

In July 2010, the court issued a writ of execution for the agreement. However, the sheriff found out that the occupants have not vacated the lot.

In May 2011, the court issued a writ of demolition and have the go signal to implement the demolition on August 2.

However, on September 2, the occupants filed a pleading before the court stating that Tuico was not authorized by the other defendants to represent them and that the compromise agreement was “void.”

In his ruling, Dumdum said the defendants cannot claimed that Tuico was not authorized by them considering he (Tuico) and nine other defendants attended the mediation proceedings.

“Granting that these defendants knew of the Compromise Agreement only then, still they waited for a year and three months before questioning the authority of Tuico. They could have very well spoken in court to manifest that Tuico acted without their authority. But they did not,” the decision reads.

Dumdum concluded the actuation of the defendants in filing the said pleading in an “unreasonable period of time” was only to delay the execution of the writ of demolition.

- (FREEMAN)