Back

Uy, et al. vs. Genato, et al.

BENITO UY, ELENA CAMACHO, EULOGIO EDEROSAS, PAULINO JONSON, FELIPE LUMANTAS, EDDIE PASTRANO, PEDRO MALINAS, BIENVENIDO ORONG, PEDRO GUANTINIAS, GUILLERMO MACARATE, BERNARDO DEGANO and AMECITO ARADO, petitioners, vs. HON. MELECIO A. GENATO, Presiding Judge

G.R. No. L-37399 | 1974-05-29

D E C I S I O N

FERNANDO, J:

It was the refusal of respondent Judge 1 to accord petitioners their constitutional right to be heard as required by procedural due process 2 to enable them to prove their claim to just compensation, against as mandated by the Constitution, 3 that led to this certiorari proceeding. More specifically, they would have us nullify an order dismissing their complaint so that the case could be heard on the merits. Certainly respondent Judge could not have been unaware that the exercise of the power of eminent domain is conditioned on compensation being awarded. For at first, he did deny the motion to dismiss,...