Manila vs. Chinese Community of Manila, et al.

GR No. L-14355; 31 October 1919

Facts:
- Manila field a petition in CFI, praying that certain lands be expropriated for the purpose of
constructing a public improvement.
- Manila alleged that for the purpose of constructing an extension of Rizal Ave. it is necessary to
acquire certain parcels of land in Binondo.
- The Chinese Community alleged in their Answer:
o That no necessity existed for said expropriation.
o That the land in question was a cemetery, which had been used as such for many
years, and was covered with sepulchres and monuments.
o One of the defendants, Tambunting, offered to grant a right of way w/o cost to
Manila, in order that the chapels and graves of his ancestors may not be disturbed.
- The Honorable Simplicio del Rosario, decided that there was no necessity for the expropriation
of the particular strip of land.

Issue & Ruling: Whether Manila can have the land expropriated. NO.

Whether or not the cemetery is public or private property, its appropriation for the uses of
a public street, especially during the lifetime of those specially interested in its maintenance as a
cemetery, should be a question of great concern, and its appropriation should not be made for such
purposes until it is fully established that the greatest necessity exists therefor. In the present case,
even granting that a necessity exists for the opening of the street in question, the record contains
no proof of the necessity of opening the same through the cemetery. The record shows that
adjoining and adjacent lands have been offered by Tambunting to the city free of charge, which
will answer every purpose of the plaintiff.