City still owes P13.4M to owners of private lot

CEBU, Philippines – The Regional Trial Court is demanding payment from the Cebu City government for the remaining P13.4 million balance of the purchase cost for the 5,285-square-meter lot owned by the late Matilde Palicte that was expropriated by the city for an urban poor project in 2001.

RTC Branch 19 sheriff Antonio Billones said the city still has a balance of P13,415,936 because its overall accountabilities to the heirs of Palicte has already reached P37,198,436 and the total amount that was garnished from the city’s depository banks only reached P23,782,500.

Billones explained that the amount that he demands from the city will continue to increase if no payment is made after June 29, 2009.

The city legislators decided to refer the matter to the City Legal Office for further study after their regular session last Wednesday.

Records show that the total amount of funds that was paid by the city, including those garnished from its depository banks, has already reached the original price of the lot.

The P13.4 million is only the computation of the applicable legal interest of the original purchase cost of land because the city failed to pay the total amount for seven years.

The 5,285-square-meter lot located in barangay Capitol Site was expropriated by the city in 2001 to prevent urban poor families living there from being evicted from the location.

Palicte’s lot is occupied by almost 200 informal settlers that prompted judge Donato Navarro of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities to order for the demolition of the illegal structures in 2001, but Mayor-on-leave Tomas Osmeña quickly intervened and offered to expropriate the lot.

Osmeña, however, refused to pay the court-approved compensation of the lot at P4,500 per square meter saying it is too expensive for the urban poor families to pay.

The city then appealed the RTC decision about the issue of the amount of the lot, but the Court of Appeals rejected the city’s appeal because its lawyers did it only after the trial court’s decision already became final and executory. — Rene U. Borromeo/BRP (THE FREEMAN)