Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Answer With Counterclaim
Answer With Counterclaim
Answer With Counterclaim
2.
Paragraphs 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 3a, 3c, 3e are denied for lack of
took possession of the areas that are described as Lot Nos. 5350-N and
Save for the legal provisions quoted in paragraph 3c, the rest
(note that there are three (3) paragraphs in the Complaint that have been
numbered 5) in that Defendants have claimed that Plaintiffs have
encroached on lots 5350-N and 5350-K are denied, the truth being that
stated in the affirmative and special defenses hereunder;
10.
13.
of title that affects all the lots mentioned by Plaintiffs in the Complaint
which are lots nos. 5350-B, 5350-F, 5350-N and 5350-K. The first two
(2) lots (5350-B and 5350-F) are not being contested by any of the
parties here, whether concerning their title or whoever is entitled to
possession thereof. The second two (2) lots (5350-N and 5350-K), on the
other hand, were the subject of the Deed of Donation (annex F of the
Complaint) by the late Roberto Tirol, Jr. to Defendants and were the
subject of the Contract of Lease (annex D of the Complaint) between
Plaintiffs parents on one hand and Defendants late father on the other.
As a result of the said donation, tax declarations over the said parcels of
land were issued in favor of Defendants;
16.
from the allegations therein that what Plaintiffs seek from the Honorable
Court is to reverse or at least render inutile the court decision in Civil
Case No. 157-M, titled, Martin Roberto G. Tirol vs. Spouses Gregorio and
Maria Lourdes Tirol-Sanson, which decision has awarded possession of lot
numbers 5350-N and 5350-K and has become executory;
4
17.
are simply all-out to restrain Defendants from taking over the possession
of lots nos. 5350-N and 5350-K. In fact, Plaintiffs and their parents have
tried every trick in our books just to frustrate the rightful and legal claim
of possession by Defendants over said lots;
Unceasing Various Legal Attacks
19.
It will be noted that Plaintiffs parents have filed a case for the
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
filed another lawsuit against Defendants this time assailing the said
Contract of Lease (annex D of the Complaint) docketed and titled, Civil
Case No. 7956 and titled, Spouses Gregorio and Ma. Lourdes Sanson vs.
Martin Roberto G.Tirol (photocopy thereof is attached herewith as
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
22.
2.
Declaring the decision of the Honorable
Public Respondent dated July 22, 2005 (affirmed
on appeal with minor modification) ineffectual
against petitioner, which is NOT a party thereto;
3.
Ordering the respondents to, jointly and
severally, pay petitioner the sum of P200,000.00 as and
by way of attorneys fees and P10,000.00 per
appearance in Court;
4.
Ordering the respondents to, jointly and
severally, pay petitioner exemplary damages, the
determination of which is left to the sound judgment of
this Court; (Boldface printing for emphasis)
xxx
23.
xxx
xxx
Judge Montalid Patnubay Jr., where the said Petition was dismissed for
Plaintiffs corporation miserable failure to prove that it was entitled to
injunctive reliefs and insinuating that one of the Plaintiffs herein, Rita
Sanson, on several times during her cross-examination was lying to the
court;
Third-Party Claim
24.
Lease was valid, regular and legal, and that Plaintiffs parents were in
default in their monthly rentals to Defendants for more than a decade,
Plaintiffs, through their corporate entity, have attempted to block, though
in vain, the execution of the decision upholding said lease contract and
the right to repossess the said lots, by filing a Third-Party Claim dated
July 18, 2009 supported by a duly notarized Secretarys Certification
8
25.
Plaintiffs parents challenged the legal title of Defendants and the latters
right to possession over the said lots. Stated otherwise, Plaintiffs and
their parents and the corporation they own, who incidentally have been
alternating in filing a barrage of lawsuits against Defendants, have only
9
one agenda, which is to stop at all cost Defendants attempts to take over
the possession of said lots, particularly lot 5350-K where a bigger portion
of one of the buildings of The Pearl of the Pacific Resort is erected on.
Said resort is owned by the Pearl of Boracay Landholdings Inc., where the
majority shareholders are no other than the family of Plaintiffs thereby
making it really a family-owned corporation;
26.
title to land or any interest therein, the plaintiff must have legal or
equitable title to, or interest in the real property which is the subject
matter of the action. (Art. 477 of the New Civil Code);
27.
hardly qualifies for a quieting of title because they have not established
equitable or legal title to the parcels of land in question;
28.
Forum-shopping
29.
the issues in this case are also bound by the principle of res judicata, as
there are already rulings by various courts awarding possession of the
subject lots to Defendants;
30.
have used all legal remedies available just so they will not be booted out
of lots 5350-N and 5350-K;
31.
32.
This time around, they have filed this suit for alleged quieting
of title in the hope that what they were not able to get from the courts
through all those legal maneuvers they have resorted to thus far, they will
be able to achieve this time;
33.
11
By Way of Counterclaim
34.
have hired the services of the undersigned counsel for an agreed amount
of Philippine Pesos: Five Hundred Thousand (PHP 500,000.00) and have
suffered sleepless nights and besmirched reputation which when
quantified in monetary terms is in the amount of Philippine Pesos: Five
Hundred Thousand (PHP 500,000.00)
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, Defendants most respectfully
pray for the dismissal of the complaint and the award of counterclaim to
them. Other reliefs are likewise prayed for.
EXPLANATION
Copy of this pleading was sent to the opposing counsel through
registered mail as personal service is impracticable.
Quezon City, December 10, 2010.
12
C E BALLO S
L A W
F I R M
PONCEVIC M. CEBALLOS
PTR No. 3212580 / 01-06-2010 / Quezon City
IBP LRN 02224 / 1-16-2001 / Caloocan City
Roll of Attorneys 33018
MCLE Exemption no. III-00827
Copy Furnished:
NOEL C. DUCUSIN
Unit 2311, 23rd Floor Herrera Tower
Valero corner V.A. Rufino Sts.
Salcedo Village, City of Makati
13