The Legal Side of Real Estate

[rocco69]

Tanong lang po.

May nabili po kaming lupa covered by tax dec by virtue of extrajudicial settlement partition at simultaneous sale. Gusto namin na magkaroon ng titulo. Now kung hindi po nagbayad ng estate tax ang mga heirs ng lupa liable ba kami sa estate tax considering na di pa titulado ito?

liable ba kami sa estate tax considering na di pa titulado ito?

 

Hindi kayo ang liable. yung heirs.

 

whether titled or not, the heirs are still liable for estate taxes. kitang-kita kasi sa documents ninyo na galing sa mana yung property (extrajudicial settlement and partition with simultaneous sale, di ba). kung straight sale lang mula sa heirs, baka sakaling makalusot pa na bentahan lang talaga.

 

as it is, the sellers having acquired the property through inheritance, they are liable for estate taxes.

[silentjasonx]

Good day,

 

I just want to ask if the government or DPWH has any say on Private roads.

Must we the owners of the Private road follow certain rules on how wide it should be?

I've read something in the DPWH saying that a pavement width should have a minimum of 6.70 meters.

The problem we have is that the road is 6.3 meters and if we will put walkways on each side do we need to surrender part of our land for that or can we just take it from the road. we are thinking of getting 0.6 meters on each side of the road making it 5.1 meters for the road. Base on how wide a Toyota Land Cruiser(1.885meters), it is still enough for 2 lanes.

 

btw. the private road is still undeveloped.

There is no problem if we give portion of the land to provide the walkways/sidewalks but if we can avoid it since it is a private road, the better.

 

Thank you

[rocco69]

Good day,

 

I just want to ask if the government or DPWH has any say on Private roads.

Must we the owners of the Private road follow certain rules on how wide it should be?

I've read something in the DPWH saying that a pavement width should have a minimum of 6.70 meters.

The problem we have is that the road is 6.3 meters and if we will put walkways on each side do we need to surrender part of our land for that or can we just take it from the road. we are thinking of getting 0.6 meters on each side of the road making it 5.1 meters for the road. Base on how wide a Toyota Land Cruiser(1.885meters), it is still enough for 2 lanes.

 

btw. the private road is still undeveloped.

There is no problem if we give portion of the land to provide the walkways/sidewalks but if we can avoid it since it is a private road, the better.

 

Thank you

if it is a private road, not for a subdivision or realty development, the DPWH would have no say as to the width, as the same is not subject to its regulatory power.

 

The Civil Code itself says:

 

Art. 437. The owner of a parcel of land is the owner of its surface and of everything under it, and he can construct thereon any works or make any plantations and excavations which he may deem proper, without detriment to servitudes and subject to special laws and ordinances. He cannot complain of the reasonable requirements of aerial navigation.

 

However, if the same is for a subdivision or realty development, the same would be subject to govt regulation, hence there would be limitations as to road width.

[silentjasonx]

if it is a private road, not for a subdivision or realty development, the DPWH would have no say as to the width, as the same is not subject to its regulatory power.

 

The Civil Code itself says:

 

Art. 437. The owner of a parcel of land is the owner of its surface and of everything under it, and he can construct thereon any works or make any plantations and excavations which he may deem proper, without detriment to servitudes and subject to special laws and ordinances. He cannot complain of the reasonable requirements of aerial navigation.

 

However, if the same is for a subdivision or realty development, the same would be subject to govt regulation, hence there would be limitations as to road width.

Hi Sir Rocco69, the private road originated from 1 land split into 3 and in order for one of the land to gain access to the main road the private road was included in dividing the land. so the land title for the road is on our names and we pay tax for it. it's like right of way or something. and we are planning to build dorms and commercial space in those lands. will this be considered realty development?

[rocco69]

Hi Sir Rocco69, the private road originated from 1 land split into 3 and in order for one of the land to gain access to the main road the private road was included in dividing the land. so the land title for the road is on our names and we pay tax for it. it's like right of way or something. and we are planning to build dorms and commercial space in those lands. will this be considered realty development?

if you don't need HLURB accreditation/permission, then no restriction on the road.

[silentjasonx]

if you don't need HLURB accreditation/permission, then no restriction on the road.

Thanks a lot Sir rocco69 for this information

[rocco69]

hi po

just want to ask about titles

can 1 title have 2 tax declaration numbers?

example

1 big lot under one title

have two tax declarations and under each tax declaration have sub lots?

it's possible. Local Government doesn't care about titles, all it cares about is getting revenues.

[rocco69]

question po regarding Agricultural Leasehold Contract.

1) May expiration po ba ito?wala kasi nakalagay sa contract

 

2) what if the parties involved are all dead? succession is automatic ba on both sides? without any updating of the contracts to reflect the present heirs?

 

3) wala po notarization and no signature on the side of MARO. pero nasa MARO. is this considered registered?

Republic Act 3844 ang sasagot sa mga katanungan mo. Ayon sa Kataas-taasang Hukuman:

 

For agricultural leasehold, the governing law is R.A. No. 3844,which, except for Section 35 thereof, was not specifically repealed by the passage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 (R.A. No. 6657), but was intended to have suppletory effect to the latter law.

 

 

1) May expiration po ba ito? Wala kasi nakalagay sa contract.

 

Section 7. Tenure of Agricultural Leasehold Relation - The agricultural leasehold relation once established shall confer upon the agricultural lessee the right to continue working on the landholding until such leasehold relation is extinguished. The agricultural lessee shall be entitled to security of tenure on his landholding and cannot be ejected therefrom unless authorized by the Court for causes herein provided.

 

Section 8. Extinguishment of Agricultural Leasehold Relation - The agricultural leasehold relation established under this Code shall be extinguished by:

(1) Abandonment of the landholding without the knowledge of the agricultural lessor;

(2) Voluntary surrender of the landholding by the agricultural lessee, written notice of which shall be served three months in advance; or

(3) Absence of the persons under Section nine to succeed to the lessee, in the event of death or permanent incapacity of the lessee.

 

Ibig sabihin, ito lang ang batayan para mawalan ng bisa ang leasehold contract. Kahit walang nakalagay sa kontrata, ang batas ay kasama sa kontrata, kung kaya't hanga't hindi nangyayari ang alin sa nakasaad sa Section 8, TULOY SI AGRICULTURAL LEASE!

 

2) what if the parties involved are all dead? succession is automatic ba on both sides? without any updating of the contracts to reflect the present heirs?

 

Kung patay na ang original na parties sa kontrata, Section 9 naman ang iiral.

 

Section 9. Agricultural Leasehold Relation Not Extinguished by Death or Incapacity of the Parties - In case of death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessee to work his landholding, the leasehold shall continue between the agricultural lessor and the person who can cultivate the landholding personally, chosen by the agricultural lessor within one month from such death or permanent incapacity, from among the following: (a) the surviving spouse; ( the eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; or © the next eldest descendant or descendants in the order of their age: Provided, That in case the death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessee occurs during the agricultural year, such choice shall be exercised at the end of that agricultural year: Provided, further, That in the event the agricultural lessor fails to exercise his choice within the periods herein provided, the priority shall be in accordance with the order herein established.

In case of death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessor, the leasehold shall bind his legal heirs.

 

3) wala po notarization and no signature on the side of MARO. pero nasa MARO. is this considered registered?

 

Magtanong sa MARO whether they consider it as registered. Whether YES or NO, that answers your question

[rocco69]

Thnx sa reply. Ffup question

Regarding sa succession. If the succession was not reported po? Tuloy pa din po? Both lessee ams lessor was not updated kasi for over 30 years.

sino ba ang nagsaka sa lupa nung mamatay yung original lessee? Kung tagapagmana niya, lumalabas tuloy pa rin yung lease.

 

kung ibang tao ang nagsaka, nagprescribe na yung karapatan nung tagapagmana ng original lessee na maghabol sa lease, at 30 years na ang lumipas.

[rocco69]

Thnx

Kakatanong ko lang pala sa barangay na wala nang nagsasaka dun kasi commercial space na dun pero dun pa din nakatira ung magsasaka at ibang mga business na gingagawa. Pued po ba kumuha ng certification na wala nang agricultural dun? Mula sa actual pero sa assessor naka agri pa ung category? Kaya wala nang bisa dapat ung agri leasehold contract

Another question kapag revival of judgment sa same branch po ba gaganapin ung kaso o panibagong branch po?

1. Pued po ba kumuha ng certification na wala nang agricultural dun? Mula sa actual pero sa assessor naka agri pa ung category? Kaya wala nang bisa dapat ung agri leasehold contract

 

hindi ang actual na gamit sa property ang nagdedetermine ng classification niya, kundi ang classification ng munisipyo.

 

kung sa zoning ng munisipyo ay agricultural pa rin siya, agricultural pa rin kahit wala nang nagsasaka dun.

 

NGUNIT, SUBALIT, DATAPWAT... Ayun sa Sec. 36 ng RA 3844:

 

Section 36. Possession of Landholding; Exceptions - Notwithstanding any agreement as to the period or future surrender, of the land, an agricultural lessee shall continue in the enjoyment and possession of his landholding except when his dispossession has been authorized by the Court in a judgment that is final and executory if after due hearing it is shown that:

(1) The agricultural lessor-owner or a member of his immediate family will personally cultivate the landholding or will convert the landholding, if suitably located, into residential, factory, hospital or school site or other useful non-agricultural purposes: Provided; That the agricultural lessee shall be entitled to disturbance compensation equivalent to five years rental on his landholding in addition to his rights under Sections twenty-five and thirty-four, except when the land owned and leased by the agricultural lessor, is not more than five hectares, in which case instead of disturbance compensation the lessee may be entitled to an advanced notice of at least one agricultural year before ejectment proceedings are filed against him: Provided, further, That should the landholder not cultivate the land himself for three years or fail to substantially carry out such conversion within one year after the dispossession of the tenant, it shall be presumed that he acted in bad faith and the tenant shall have the right to demand possession of the land and recover damages for any loss incurred by him because of said dispossessions.

(2) The agricultural lessee failed to substantially comply with any of the terms and conditions of the contract or any of the provisions of this Code unless his failure is caused by fortuitous event or force majeure;

(3) The agricultural lessee planted crops or used the landholding for a purpose other than what had been previously agreed upon;

(4) The agricultural lessee failed to adopt proven farm practices as determined under paragraph 3 of Section twenty-nine;

(5) The land or other substantial permanent improvement thereon is substantially damaged or destroyed or has unreasonably deteriorated through the fault or negligence of the agricultural lessee;

(6) The agricultural lessee does not pay the lease rental when it falls due: Provided, That if the non-payment of the rental shall be due to crop failure to the extent of seventy-five per centum as a result of a fortuitous event, the non-payment shall not be a ground for dispossession, although the obligation to pay the rental due that particular crop is not thereby extinguished; or

(7) The lessee employed a sub-lessee on his landholding in violation of the terms of paragraph 2 of Section twenty-seven.

 

Baka naman may violation si lessee na bumabagsak sa Sec. 36. Pupwede siyang kasuhan ng ejectment pag ganun.

 

 

2. kapag revival of judgment sa same branch po ba gaganapin ung kaso o panibagong branch po?

 

depende kung personal action o real action yung nire-revive. Pag personal action (daños etc.) kung saan nakatira yung partido. Pag real action (titulo o pag-aari ng lupa ang usapin) sa hukuman kung nasaan yung lupa. Kung kaya't kung maraming branch ng RTC sa lugar kung nasaan yung lupa, hindi siya automatic na sa same branch babagsak. Ira-raffle din siya.

[rocco69]

Thnx again

Regarding sa revival of judgement.

There is this case kasi the case was decided by rtc. The decision consisted of who the rightful owner is of a disputed lot. After which the decision was appealed to CA. But CA dismissed it. Since appelants did not submit their briefs. So CA entered judgement after dismissal. My questions are: 1) is the decision final? Meaning may finality ba o wala. 2)requred ba ung writ of execution or not? Pinuntahan namin ung rtc asking them to issue cert of finality. sabi ung CA na daw ung finality kasi mas mataas sila. Pero since dismissed parang di final? What do u think po thnx.

1) is the decision final? Meaning may finality ba o wala.

 

Kung dinsimiss yung case, the Decision dismissing the case also becomes final.

 

2) Required ba yung writ of execution or not? Kung me gagawin pa sa Decision ng RTC, kailangan ng writ of execution para maipatupad ito. Sa RTC ka hihingi ng writ of execution.

Ang RTC naman, bago nila aksyunan nag motion mo, ay hihingi ng ebidensya na final na yung decision. At yung "entry of judgment" ng CA ang ebidensya mo na yun. Ito ang magsasabi na final na ang decision ng CA

Edited March 7, 2018 by rocco69

[rocco69]

 

 

 

thanks po sa reply.

 

1) rtc decision 2000

2) CA dismissal without reviewing the case kasi di nagsubmit ng briefs ung mga appelants. 2002

3) since naglapse na ung 5 years,

4) RTC decision was only saying who the rightful owners of the lot and some payments to the owners.

5) pued pa ba or needed pa ba ung writ of execution or self-execution na ung decision for the ownership issue excluding the collection of damages?

 

do we need the revival or the CA decision should be enough? sorry clear ko lang kasi di ko alam kung need ng revival or no need.

dahil lampas 10 years na, kahit revival di na pwede. pasalamat kayo at ang decision sinasabi lang who the rightful owner is. di na yun kailangan ng writ of execution kung kayo ang nakapwesto sa lugar

[rocco69]

May squatter pano po yan need pa ba writ of execution?

Ang squatter ay hindi kasama dun sa kaso, kaya hindi siya bound ng decision na yun.

 

Kailangan sampahan ng sariling kaso, for ejectment, yung squatter

[rocco69]

Ah yes po ejectment case. pero the decision still applies to the ownership? Pinakaconcern ko is kung may bisa ung decision without the writ of execution.

yes. your problem really is that the decision is binding only on the parties in the case. as to others, you still have to present your proof of ownership (which will probably be the same evidence used in the prior case)

[Pen15]

Hi. Ano po mangyayari kung fullpaid na ang lot with complete deed of sale except di pa naililipat sa name ko ang title tapos namatay ang owner? Makukuha ko pa ba ang title? Tia