Cainta-Pasig boundary row should be resolved first, CA rules
[ Manila Bulletin Online ] November 3, 2008
By DANNY JUNCO
CAINTA, Rizal — The Court of Appeals (CA) has reversed a Pasig Regional Trial Court’s (RTC) decision ordering Sta. Lucia Realty Development Inc. (SLRDI) to pay back real estate taxes to the city government of Pasig.
In a decision, CA Justice Alino Hormachuelos ruled that in Civil Case No. 660555, a final adjudication cannot be made without injuring or adversely affecting Cainta’s interest.
The CA decision stated that the municipality of Cainta has a pending case at the Antipolo RTC in connection with its dispute with Pasig.
The CA decision likewise stated that the Cainta government has legal interest, which is actual, direct, and material over the subject matter.
The CA also ruled that Cainta’s rights cannot be adequately protected in a separate proceeding because to rule that Sta. Lucia is liable to pay real estate taxes to Pasig would pre-empt the outcome of the boundary dispute pending at the Antipolo RTC.
In 1997, the Pasig City government filed a case in its bid to collect real estate taxes from SLRDI.
But the realty company argued that its mall is located in the territorial jurisdiction of Cainta. The company said it has been paying taxes to Cainta.
The boundary dispute between Cainta and Pasig involves SLRDI’s property. The case has yet to be resolved by the Antipolo RTC.
The Pasig RTC, however, rendered a decision ordering SLRDI to pay P500,000 in back taxes to Pasig.
However, the realty firm had appealed the decision of the Pasig RTC to the Court of Appeals. It asked that CA declare the decision null and void.
When the tax case was still being heard by the Pasig RTC, the Cainta government filed a motion for intervention, citing its substantial interest in the pending tax case.
However, the Pasig RTC denied Cainta’s motion and its subsequent motion for reconsideration.
This prompted the Cainta municipal government to elevate the case to the Court of Appeals.
"We are elated by the decision of the Court of Appeals, and the Cainta government should stand as an indispensable party in the case and allowed to intervene. We would be given the opportunity to present our case and prove that our town is the rightful taxing authority covering the Sta. Lucia property," Cainta Mayor Ramon Ilagan said.
Mayor Ilagan also said, "we have been inching ourselves closer to recovering Cainta’s lost territorial area. We will continue and persevere in pursuing the cases as we owe it to our people to restore to them what belongs to our town," Ilagan added.
Keith Niet, Cainta legal officer, represented Cainta in the case.
