Rule 67 - expropriation1. Napocor v. Purefoods, G.R. No. 160725, 565 SR! 17, 12 Septe"#er 200$a. To construct and maintain its Northwestern Luzon Project, NAPOCOR had to acquire an easement of right-of-wa o!er certain "arce#s of #and$. RTCi. NAPOCOR fi#ed a s"ecia# ci!i# action for eminent domainii. res"ondent %eirs of Trinidad c#aimed that the shou#d $e indemnified for the !a#ueof the affected "ro"ert $ased on the "re!ai#ing mar&et "urchase "rice of P'().))*sq m iii. Purefoodsa!erred that NAPOCOR+s offer was e,cessi!e# #ow, under!a#ued and o$so#ete and that its action had caused e,treme "rejudice to its in!estment and further de#a in the construction and de!e#o"ment of its "igger $usiness, there$ ad!erse# affecting its o"eration.i!. NAPOCOR fi#ed its -rgent Ex Parte .otion for the /ssuance of 0rit ofPossession wherein it a##eged that it had de"osited with the Land 1an& of thePhi#i""ines a "ro!isiona# !a#uation of the "ro"erties sought to $e e,"ro"riated and that it had sent a Notice to Ta&e Possession!. RTC issued a writ of "ossession. !i. the commissioners recommended that the com"ensation due from NAPOCOR$e $ased on the fair mar&et !a#ue of P2)).))*sq m for "ro"erties $e#onging to res"ondent .o#de, and P3)).))*sq m for the unde!e#o"ed or underde!e#o"ed "ro"erties $e#onging to the rest of the res"ondentsc. RTC ado"ted the recommendation of Commissioners with with #ega# interest at 24 "er annum from 5anuar 2, 6778 unti# fina#it of this 9ecision and at 6:4 "er annum from itsfina#it unti# fu## "ament thereof.d. CAi. NAPOCOR contends that on# an easement of right-of-wa for the construction ofthe transmission #ine "roject is $eing c#aimed, thus, on# an easement fee equi!a#ent to 6)4 of the fair mar&et !a#ue of the "ro"erties shou#d $e "aid to the affected "ro"ert owners ;RA 87'( An Act To