Badillo Vs Tayag Case Digest – GR No. 173976 April 3, 2003

Badillo Vs Tayag Case Digest

Badillo Vs Tayag Case Digest


The National Housing Authority (NHA), a government-owned and controlled corporation, is exempt from paying appellate docket fees when it sues or is sued in relation to its governmental function of providing mass housing. It is likewise exempt from filing a supersedeas bond that will stay the execution of a forcible entry case. In order to have some bases for fixing the reasonable amount of rent in a forcible entry case, courts must rely on the evidence presented by the parties.


MIAA vs CA Case Digest

VFP vs Reyes Case Digest

Facts

Petitioners claimed that they were the owners and exclusive possessors of a portion of land that had been awarded by the National Housing Authority (NHA) to Triad Construction and Development Corporation (Triad) as a result of winning the bidding. They argued that the NHA intruded on, occupied, and developed their property despite their protests.

Issue

Whether NHA, being a government-owned and controlled corporation, is also a government instrumentality.

Ruling

Yes.

The NHA is mandated by PD 757 to develop and implement a comprehensive, integrated housing program for the greatest number of people. Thus, to be able to perform its governmental functions, it is vested with sovereign powers.

As a government instrumentality, NHA is exempt from paying all kinds of legal fees.

Finally, the belated prayer of the NHA for the dismissal of the forcible entry case cannot be granted, because it appealed the RTC Decision to the CA, not to this Court. As a mere respondent in these appealed cases, the NHA is not entitled to any affirmative relief. Besides, we would not want to preempt the CA’s action on the said appeal.


Badillo Vs Tayag Case Digest

Total
0
Shares
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Related Posts