Realty Exchange Venture v. Sendino
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: Private respondent Lucina S. Sendino entered into a reservation agreement with Realty Exchange Venture, Inc. (REVI) for a lot in Sucat, Paranaque. She paid a reservation fee and a downpayment. REVI subsequently informed her of the cancellation of the contract, citing alleged non-compliance with the submission of required documents. 2. Procedural History: Private respondent filed a complaint for Specific Performance against REVI with the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) Office of Appeals, Adjudication and Legal Affairs (OAALA), seeking to enforce the sale and damages. The petition was amended to include Magdiwang Realty Corporation (MRC) as the registered owner. The HLURB rendered judgment in favor of private respondent. An appeal to the HLURB OAALA Arbiter affirmed the decision. The subsequent appeal to the Office of the President resulted in the dismissal of petitioners' appeal, which was later denied reconsideration. 3. The Petition: Petitioners seek review of the Office of the President's decision, treating the petition as one for certiorari. They raise issues concerning the quasi-judicial functions of the HLURB, the validity of its decisions rendered by divisions, and the applicability of Republic Act No. 6552 to reservation agreements. Specifically, they challenge the HLURB's authority, the nature of the lot as paraphernal, and the requirement of notarial notice for cancellation of reservation agreements.
Issue(s)
Whether the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) possesses quasi-judicial functions and the authority to delegate its adjudicatory powers. Whether the public respondent gravely abused its discretion in declaring the subject lot as paraphernal despite its alleged conjugal nature. Whether the public respondent gravely abused its discretion in declaring that only a notarial notice of rescission is valid for canceling a reservation agreement pursuant to Republic Act No. 6552.
Ruling
The petition is dismissed for lack of merit. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Office of the President, upholding the HLURB's quasi-judicial powers and its ruling in favor of the private respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
On the HLURB's Quasi-Judicial Functions and Delegation of Authority: The Court affirmed that the HLURB possesses quasi-judicial functions, inherited from its predecessor agencies like the Human Settlements Regulatory Commission (HSRC) and the National Housing Authority (NHA). Executive Order No. 648 and Presidential Decree No. 1344 explicitly granted the HSRC and NHA, respectively, the exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving specific performance of contractual obligations filed by buyers of subdivision lots or condominium units. The HLURB, as the successor agency, continues to exercise these adjudicatory powers, including the power to award damages. The Court also found no error in the Board of Commissioners dividing itself into divisions to decide cases, citing Section 5 of E.O. 648 which allows the adoption of rules of procedure for the conduct of business and the practical necessity of delegating functions due to the number of commissioners and cases. The power to delegate is implied unless expressly withheld. On the Nature of the Lot: This issue was not directly resolved by the Court as it focused on the procedural and substantive aspects of the contract cancellation. The Court noted that the issue of the husband's non-joinder in the original complaint was a procedural slip that did not invalidate the proceedings, especially since the petitioners participated without objection. The Court's primary focus was on the validity of the contract cancellation and the HLURB's jurisdiction. On the Applicability of RA 6552 and Cancellation of Reservation Agreement: The Court held that Republic Act No. 6552 is applicable to reservation agreements, citing Section 24 of P.D. 957 which states that the rights of a buyer in case of failure to pay installments (other than due to developer's failure to develop) shall be governed by RA 6552. The definition of "sale" under P.D. 957 is broad enough to include reservation agreements. RA 6552 mandates cancellation by notarial act, among other requirements. Therefore, the petitioners' precipitate cancellation of the contract without observing the conditions imposed by RA 6552 was invalid and improper. The Court reiterated that rules of procedure are liberally construed in administrative bodies, and the HLURB-OAALA acted within its authority in ordering the petitioners to comply with their obligations.
Main Doctrine
The Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) possesses quasi-judicial powers, including the authority to hear and decide cases for specific performance and award damages, derived from its predecessor agencies. The cancellation of a reservation agreement must comply with the notarial notice requirement under Republic Act No. 6552.