Republic of the Philippines

2ND MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT

10th Judicial Region
Manolo Fortich- Libona
Province of Bukidnon

ARLENE Q. PRESTENBACH e
Plaintiff, l
i
F m
o i
r n
: a
r
F y
o
r M
c a
i n
b d
l a
e t
o
E r
n y
t
r I
y n
j
w u
i n
t c
h t
i
P o
r n
 w a
i n
t d
h
D
T a
e m
m a
p g
o e
r s
a
r - versus –
y
JHORIZZA A. OBNIAL, NILDA
R
OBNIAL, ARNEL DUMALOG,
e
BLACKWATER PHILS.
s
SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.,
t
JOHN DOES AND PETER DOES
r Defendant.
a
CIVIL CASE NO. 18-545
i
n
i
FOR: FORCIBLE ENTRY WITH
n
PRELIMINARY MANDATORY
g
INJUNCTION WITH
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
O
ORDER AND DAMAGES
r
d
e
r
x---------------------------/
ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM AND AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES

COME NOW, Defendants by counsel and unto this Honorable

court most respectfully aver by way of

ANSWER

1. That Defendants admit Paragraph 1 of the Complaint in so far as

the personal circumstances and addresses of the Defendants;

2. That Defendants deny with qualification Paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of

the Complaint in that the description of the land, Lot No. 115-A is
admitted to be true and correct, with the qualification that the
purpose of the loan is not admitted;

3. That Defendants admit Paragraph 5 of the Complaint, with the

further admission that the loan of P250,000 has not been paid up to
the present as Defendants also admit the due execution of the real
estate mortgage on July 31, 2000;

4. That Defendants deny specifically Paragraphs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,

14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 of the Complaint, the truth being those
alleged in the Affirmative Defenses; and by way of

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

5. That this Complaint should be dismissed for lack of cause of

action. In an action for Forcible Entry as how this present case is
entitled, the Plaintiff must have a clear right over the land. In this
case, the title of the land is in the name of Jhorizza A. Obnial, the
Defendant in this case. There is no deed of sale, deed of donation,
not even an Extrajudicial or Judicial Foreclosure. Therefore, the
land belongs to Jhorizza A. Obnial and she cannot be evicted from
her own land as she cannot also be charged of forcibly entering
her own land. The mortgagee, Arlene Prestenbach, does not have a
better right of possession and control over the land of the titled
 owner. Therefore, there is no cause of action in this Forcible Entry
Complaint and this has to be outrightly dismissed;

6. As regards to the other Defendants, excepting Jhorizza A. Obnial,

there is also lack of cause of action because there is no contractual,
legal or moral relationship between Plaintiff and the other
Defendants. The other Defendants do not know Arlene
Prestenbach from Adam and for lack of legal relation there is no
cause of action against them and this case has to be dismissed;

7. Laches should also be a basis for the dismissal of this Complaint.

As alleged by the Plaintiff in her Complaint, the fencing of the
land by the Defendant Jhorizza A. Obnial and her mother, Nilda
Obnial was done on July 31, 2018. However, this Complaint was
filed only on September 14, 2018 or almost two (2) months already
from the entry,

If indeed Plaintiff Arlene Prestenbach was in possession of the

property, why did it take her almost two months to file the
Forcible Entry Complaint? The truth of the matter is that Arlene
Prestenbach is a German national who is prohibited to own land
and is a permanent resident of Germany. There is therefore no
proof that she has been in actual possession of the land because
she is a permanent resident of Germany being a citizen of the
country. Foreigners like Arlene Prestenbach are prohibited from
owning lands in the Philippines and therefore, there is therefore
no basis for her to claim a better right of possession and
ownership over the land as already argued about and the Forcible
Entry Case which was belatedly filed is barred by laches through
unreasonable inaction by the Plaintiff within a reasonable period.
Therefore, this case should be dismissed, and by way of;

COUNTERCLAIM

8. That Defendants were dragged into this baseless and unfounded

and malicious Complaint and for which reason they suffered
 sleepless nights, mental anguish, social humiliation, moral shock
and wounded feelings for which reason Plaintiffs should be
ordered to pay moral damages to the Defendants in the amount of
at least P1, 000, 000;

9. That to teach Plaintiff a lesson not to unreasonably and

maliciously sue any person without just cause, and by way of
example for the public good, Plaintiff should be ordered to pay
Defendant to pay exemplary damages in the sum of P200,000;

10. That in order to defend and protect the rights of the Defendants
against the baseless and malicious Complaint of the Plaintiff,
Defendants were forced to engage the services of counsel and to
pay acceptance fee of P200,000 and appearance fee of P8,000 per
hearing for which Plaintiff should be ordered to recompensate the
Defendants;

PRAYER

Wherefore, premises considered it is respectfully prayed of

this Honorable Court that on the grounds of lack of cause of action
and laches, this Complaint should be outrightly dismissed and the
counterclaims of the Defendants be granted and awarded as follows:

1. ONE MILLION PESOS (P1,000,000.00) for moral damages;

2. TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P200,000.00) for

exemplary damages;

3. TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P200,000.00) for

Attorney’s fees and EIGHT THOUSAND PESOS
(P8,000.00) appearance fee per hearing ;

4. Plus other costs of suit.

OTHER RELIEFS just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

 Respectfully submitted this 27th day of September2018 for Manolo,
Fortich, Bukidnon.
 THE FIRM
|PALLUGNA | PALLUGNA | QUIMPO | ALENTON |
|RADAZA | ABBU | ABBU | MACALOS|
Door 5, Borromeo Building. Tomas Saco – 14th Streets
Macasandig, Cagayan de Oro City 9000

By: ATTY. ALEJANDRO JOSE C. PALLUGNA

Counsel for the Defendants
Attorney’s Roll No. 37984
IBP No. Temporary (2018-pd 02/31/18)
PTR. No. 3713476 (Jan. 15, 2018)
MCLE Compliance No.V-0009612 (Apr. 14, 2019)
Tel. No. (088) 323-1347