Heirs of ‘lot owner’ sue Capitol

LOT claimants have lodged a complaint in court to recover a 4,741-square-meter lot registered under the name of the Cebu Provincial Government.

The heirs of the late Francisco Almario and wife Felipa Zafra filed civil case for nullification of deed of exchange against Capitol represented by Gov. Gwendolyn Garcia.

“Defendant (Capitol) was unjustly enriched at the expense of the plaintiff’s properties,” the complaint, which was filed on Wednesday and prepared by lawyer Richard Bauzon read.

The lot successors are represented by their attorney-in-fact Casiano Almario Jr.

Sought for reaction, Provincial Attorney Marino Martinquilla said they will reserve their comment until they get a copy of the complaint.

Once they have the charge sheet, Martinquilla said he will verify the properties with the Capitol’s real estate administrator.

Subdivided

In the four-page complaint, Bauzon said Almario and Zafra owned Lot 925, comprising four hectares, along Gorordo Ave. in Barangay Lahug, Cebu City.

Lot 925 was then subdivided into several parcels of land, among them Lot 925-A, which has an area of 4,741 square meters.

In March 1953, then governor Sergio Osmeña and the couple’s heirs entered into a deed of exchange involving the parcels of lands.

In the legal document, the Province swapped its three parcels of lot with that of the couple’s Lot 925-A.

Then President Ferdinand Marcos also approved the deed of exchange.

But without their knowledge, the parcels of lot that Capitol conveyed to the couple were issued transfer certificates of title 25177 and 25178 allegedly under the names of another Cebu City-based family using another deed of exchange.

Civil action

Bauzon said his clients initiated civil action before the Cebu City Regional Trial Court to cancel the transfer of certificates of title 25177 and 25178.

The lower court nullified the certificates of title, but the Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s ruling.

The Supreme Court also denied the petition for review filed by the plaintiff.

Despite that, Bauzon said Lot 925-A, which was originally owned by his clients, was transferred to Capitol’s name.

However, the plaintiffs didn’t get anything from Capitol since the lot they were supposed to get was given to the other family, the complaint said.

Bauzon said they sent a letter to the Provincial Government asking them to pay the lot successors the fair market value of Lot 925-A, but they did not receive any reply.

Capitol also transferred under its name the ownership of Lot 925-A using the deed of exchange as basis, Bauzon said.

The lot successors asked the court to restore the original ownership of Lot 925-A through the issuance of another title under their names.