Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT OF PAMBUJAN-SILVINO LOBOS

8th Judicial Region
Pambujan, Northern Samar

ARLYN CLERIGO
Plaintiff
Civil Case No. 0001

-versus- For: Recovery of Possession with

prayer for preliminary Injunction

AIZA MERCADER
Defendant
x---------------------------------------------x

ANSWER

Defendant, Aiza Mercader, through the counsel, unto this Honorable Court
most respectfully avers,

1. Paragraph 1 and 2 of the complaint is admitted with the additional

averment that she may be served with all court processes through the
undersigned counsel.

2. Paragraphs 3, 5, 6, and 15 of the complaint is partially admitted in so

far as a current tax declaration is under the name of the Plaintiff to
which the Defendant has no knowledge that the same was being paid
by the Plaintiff and that the tax declaration has already been changed
under the Plaintiff’s name. It only came to their knowledge that the real
property tax was being paid by the Plaintiff upon receipt of the
complaint.

3. Paragraph 4 is specifically denied in so far as the sale between

Reynaldo Mercader and the plaintiff is concerned the truth being those
alleged in the Affirmative Defenses below.

4. The allegation made in Paragraph 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 pertaining
to the tolerance of the Plaintiff towards the Defendant in using the
parcel of land and the incessant demand by the Plaintiff is specifically
denied. The truth of the matter is that the subject land has been in the
possession of the Defendant’s family for more than four generations
that the Plaintiff is now claiming to be hers without legal basis for
ownership nor possession; that the Defendant and her ascendants
have been exercising the attributes of ownership thereof as evidenced
by their obtaining Tax Declaration over the property thereon enclosed
as Annex “1” the Tax Declaration No. 13568 under the name of

1
 Reynaldo Mercader covering the property known as Lot No. 3456 with
an area of 550 sq. m. and as Annex “2” the official receipt issued by
the Municipal Treasurer of Pambujan, N. Samar that the real property
taxes have been paid with Real Property Tax Receipt 6021890 dated
December 31, 1948 and for the year 1949-1996 under the name of
Reynaldo Mercader and hereto attached as Annex “3” and series.

5. Paragraph 7 is admitted in so far as a demand was indeed made by

the Plaintiff for the Defendant and her family to vacate the subject
property. However, the Defendant did not heed to the Plaintiff’s
demand as it alleges that the Plaintiff has no basis nor justification to
possess and exercise ownership in the said property, the truth being
those alleged in the Affirmative Defenses below.

6. Paragraph 8 is admitted in so far as the Defendant’s house was indeed

destroyed by fire. The Plaintiff without just cause placed a fence over
the property but was subsequently removed by the Defendant so as to
start the construction of their home in view the healing necessary
coming from a tragedy that struck the Defendant’s family to which the
Plaintiff has continuously disturbs whereby the defendant has no
founded knowledge as to why the plaintiff would be interested in the
subject land.

7. Paragraph 9 of the Complaint is denied for lack of knowledge or

information to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity thereof, the
allegations therein being matters known only to, and are within the
control only, of the Plaintiff because the Defendant has not seen nor
receive any copy of the Notice of Illegal Construction issued by the
Office of the Building Official.

8. Paragraph 10 is admitted in so far as cease and desist letter was sent

by the Plaintiff and was duly received by the Defendant. But the truth of
the matter is that the plaintiff does not possess any legal right to do so.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Defendant hereby replead and incorporate the allegations in the

foregoing paragraphs and further alleges:

9. That herein Defendant Aiza Mercader is the heir and granddaughter of

Reynaldo Mercader who is the original possessor of the subject lot
since 1948. (hereto attached and marked as Annex “4” is the affidavit
of Jusa Wellia de la Cruz)

10. The Plaintiff is not the owner of the subject property, contrary to her
allegation in paragraph 3, 4, 5, 12, and 13; that that the Defendant and
her ascendants have been exercising the attributes of ownership and
have been in actual, open, continuous, peaceful and exclusive

2
 possession since 1948. (hereto attached and marked as Annex “5” is
the affidavit of Manolo Alvarez and Annex “6” a Certification of
Residency from the Office of the Barangay Chairman”)

11. That Reynaldo Mercader incurred a loan to the plaintiff amounting to

Fifteen thousand pesos (P15,000.00) on September 9, 1996 and was
forced as a collateral to execute a deed of sale in favor of the plaintiff.
Due to the dire situation of Reynaldo’s daughter Aileen Mercader being
confined in the hospital because of cancer, he was forced to execute
the same. But the same loan was paid one (1) year and Reynaldo
believed in good faith that the deed of absolute sale was cancelled
upon payment. (hereto attached is the medical certificate of Aileen
Mercader and the judicial affidavit of Manuelito Clergio)

12. That herein Defendant admit that because of the constant tragedies
that befell the family, their means to settle the real property of the
subject lot has not been met since 1997. However, there is no showing
how the Plaintiff has come to acquire or possess the property which
will warrant her valid payment for Tax Declaration on the subject
property.

COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM

DEFENDANT replead, restate and incorporate by way of reference the

averments in the foregoing paragraphs in so far as material hereof and
furthermore submit:

13. That wanton, reckless, malicious, capricious and whimsical act of

herein Plaintiffs in filing this baseless and unfounded complaint, is
nothing but designed to harass and embarrass Defendant, caused the
latter to suffer and experience fright, serious anxiety, moral shock,
mental anguish, social humiliation, besmirched reputation and similar
injuries for which Plaintiffs should be punished to pay Defendant moral
damages which though incapable of pecuniary estimation, in this case
should not be less than Php 5, 000.

14. That this unfounded suit forced Defendant to litigate in Court and will
incur expenses in litigation conservatively estimated at Php 3, 500.00
at this level and for which Plaintiffs should be made to reimburse the
Defendant.

15. That order to warn the public and set an example so that others
similarly situated and minded may be put on guard, Plaintiffs should be
adjudged exemplary damages in favor of Defendant in such amount as
this Honorable Court may fairly assess and determine but not less than
Php 3,000.00 ;

3
 16. That herein Plaintiffs should likewise be made to pay the cost of the
suit.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, after due notice and hearing Defendant respectfully pray this
Honorable Court to render judgment against Plaintiff and in favor Defendant
as follows:
1. In the event this Honorable Court proceeds with the case, after trial on
the merits, decision be rendered as follows;
A. Dismissing the instant complaint for utter lack of merit;
B. Ordering Plaintiffs or any other person acting under her direction to
respect the actual possession of herein Defendant as lawful
possessor.
C. Order the cancellation of any tax declaration under the name of the
plaintiff.
D. On the Counter-claim, order Plaintiffs to pay Defendant viz:
a. Php 3,500.00 litigation expenses at this level.
b. Php 5,000.00 for and as moral damages;
c. Php 3,000.00 for and as exemplary damages;
d. And pay the cost of suit.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the circumstances are likewise prayed
for. Pambujan, Northern Samar, Philippines, 20 October 2019

ATTY. KRISTA NINA FARYL RETUYA

Counsel for the Defendant
Pambujan, N. Samar
Roll No. 71189
IBP No.:891107/07-11-19
PTR No.: 87654321/07-14-19
MCLE: 0512598

COPY FURNISHED;

ATTY. DIANA FLOR DIVINA

Counsel for Plaintiff
Brgy. North, San Jose
Northern, Samar

4
 VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM
SHOPPING

I, AIZA C. MERCADER, of legal age, Filipino citizen, with

capacity to sue and be sued, resident of Brgy. Cababtuan, Pambujan,
Northern Samar, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law,
depose and state that:
1. We are the counter claimants in the above-stated case;
2. We caused the preparation of the foregoing complaint;
3. We have read the contents thereof and the facts stated therein are
true and correct of my personal knowledge and/or on the basis of
copies of documents and records in our possession;
4. We have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving
the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any
other tribunal or agency;
5. To the best of our knowledge and belief, no such action or
proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals,
or any other tribunal or agency;
6. If we should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has
been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, we undertake to report
that fact within five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Court.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand this 20th day

of October 2019.

AIZA C. MERCADER
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 20th day of

October 2019 at Pambujan, N. Samar by the affiant who is personally
known to me.

ATTY. KRISTA NINA FARYL RETUYA

Counsel for the Defendant
Pambujan, N. Samar
Roll No. 71189
IBP No.:891107/07-11-19
PTR No.: 87654321/07-14-19
MCLE: 0512598

5
Doc. No. ______;
Page No. ______;
Book No. ______;
Series of 2019.

PROOF OF SERVICE AND EXPLANATION

I, HEREBY CERTIFY under my oath as a member of the Bar that copy of this
pleading was served on Plaintiff’s counsel Atty. Diana Flor Divina at her
address on record by registered mail with return card, postage pre-paid,
posted at Mondragon, Northern Samar with instructions to the postmaster to
return the mail matter if unclaimed within ten (10) days from notice. The
registry receipt is hereto posted as proof of mailing. That the substituted
mode of service was resorted to due distance of Plaintiffs’ counsel’s address.

ATTY. KRISTA NINA FARYL RETUYA