A RESIDENT of a subdivision, who was sued by a Court of Appeals (CA) official and four other neighbors for building a house that allegedly blocks their view of the city’s landscape, has asked the court to deny the petition for a temporary restraining order.
Anna Marie Noval, of Buena Hills in Barangay Guadalupe, Cebu City, said their house is seven meters away from the houses of petitioners CA Associate Justice Portia Hormachuelos and Dr. Warfe Engracia and wife, Elaine.
Noval also labeled the filing of the complaint as “plainly whimsical and capricious and gravely tainted with wanton alacrity,
setting a bad example in the community.”
The issue started after the Engracia couple, Hormachuelos, Reynaldo Gayas and wife Melanie filed a civil complaint against Noval before the Regional Trial Court.
The petitioners said the construction of Noval’s house is a “blatant” violation of the right of the petitioners to easement light and a view of the Cebu City lowlands.
They said under the law on easement of light and view, a building should not be built higher than the window of the dominant estate.
Memorandum
Noval’s lawyer, Allan Talisaysay, submitted his client’s answer with counterclaim and memorandum to the petition and
assailed the filing of the complaint.
Talisaysay said the construction of Noval’s residence has complied with the law and was duly reviewed and approved by the Office of the Building Official.
“It has not deprived nor impaired any of plaintiffs’ capacity to appreciate and enjoy the panoramic view of Metro Cebu,” said Talisaysay, adding the petitioners can still view the landscape of Cebu City, and those of the cities of Mandaue, Lapu-Lapu and Talisay.
“The capacity to appreciate and enjoy the beautiful (view) is absolutely subjective and purely dependent on one’s aesthetic sensibilities,” the lawyer said.
Talisaysay said the construction of Noval’s house was ordered stopped in March 2010 following a letter-complaint filed at the OBO. The construction resumed after OBO inspector Jennifer Sering declared in her report that “all setbacks were properly observed and there are no changes as to the plans submitted and approved.”
Talisaysay also said the application for a restraining order has become moot and academic since the act to be restrained was accomplished,an ocular inspection in the area showed.
Talisaysay asked the court that his client be paid P500,000 for moral, exemplary and nominal damages; P200,000 for actual damages; P100,000 for attorney’s fees; P2,000 per court appearance; and P30,000 for litigation expenses.