Page 1 of 5

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF BARILI
7th Judicial Region
Branch 60
Municipality of Barili

HEIRS OF HYUN BIN,

namely VICO BIN, RICO
BIN, and NICO BIN,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Case No. 12345
FOR: Nullity of
-versus-
Documents, Quieting
of Title with Damages
QUEEN’S CHOICE and Attorney’s Fees
CORPORATION, and
PERLA BON married to
ARIEL BON,
Defendants.
x ------------------------------- x

ANSWER WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,

COUNTERCLAIM AND CROSS-CLAIM

COMES NOW, Defendant Queen’s Choice Corporation, by and

through the undersigned counsels and unto this Honorable Court most
respectfully submits this answer, averring that:

1. Defendant ADMITS the allegations in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of

the Complaint which pertain to the personal circumstances of
the Plaintiffs and the Defendants;

2. Defendant lacks knowledge or information to form a belief as

to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraphs 6, 7, 8
and 9 of the complaint and therefore, specifically DENIES the
same;

3. Defendant specifically DENIES the allegation in paragraph 10

of the complaint, the truth of the matter is that the issuance of
the Certificate of Title over the subject lot in favor of Perla Bon
(Perla) was done in the regular performance of the Director of
Lands. Further, its validity cannot be anymore assailed of as
more than one (1) year has lapsed since the time they were
Civil Case No. 12345 Page 2 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim and Crossclaim
Heirs of Hyun Bin v. Queen’s Choice Corporation, et. al.
x---------------------------------------------/

issued. Hence, prescription has already set in. A certified true

copy of the Certificate of Title is attached hereto as ANNEX 1;

4. Defendant specifically DENIES the allegation in paragraph 11

of the complaint, the truth being that Siri, Perla and Ariel held
the properties in the concept of an owner and not just mere
trustees of the Plaintiffs. The act of Siri in donating the subject
lot to Perla without the consent of the Plaintiffs, the act of Perla
in applying for free patents over the subject properties, and
having the tax receipts declared under their names would
prove their adverse possession over the properties, which are
all contrary to an act of a mere holder or trustee. A copy of the
Deed of Donation and Tax Declarations are attached hereto
as ANNEX 2 and ANNEX 3, respectively;

By way of Special and Affirmative defenses, Defendant avers that:

5. The action has already prescribed since more than ten (10)
years had lapsed since the titles over the subject lots were
granted to Perla, the predecessor-in-interest of Queen’s
Choice Corporation;

a. While the complaint was denominated as an action for

the " Nullity of Documents, Quieting of Title with
Damages and Attorney’s Fees", a review of the facts
alleged and the reliefs sought therein reveals that
reconveyance is the end goal. The Plaintiffs claimed to
be the owners of the subject lots based on their alleged
right as heirs of Hyun Bin and then claimed that the
defendants herein dispossessed them of the same;

b. An action for reconveyance of a parcel of land based on

implied or constructive trust prescribes in ten (10) years,
the point of reference being the date of registration of
the deed or the date of the issuance of the certificate of
title over the property; 1

c. In the case at bar, the Plaintiffs allege that Defendant

Perla merely holds the properties in trust for them. It is
however, evident that this trust was repudiated by the
latter when Perla applied for free patent and was
granted titles over the subject lots back in 1992. More
than ten (10) years had already lapsed since then, thus,
this action should be dismissed based on Prescription;

1 Ocampo vs Ocampo, GR No. 227894, July 5, 2017

Civil Case No. 12345 Page 3 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim and Crossclaim
Heirs of Hyun Bin v. Queen’s Choice Corporation, et. al.
x---------------------------------------------/

6. The case fails to state a cause of action because the Plaintiffs

herein are not real parties in interest. They have not been
declared by the court as heirs of the late Hyun Bin (Hyun, for
brevity) and such determination requires a special proceeding
and is not proper in the civil action currently filed by the
Plaintiffs;

a. In cases wherein alleged heirs of a decedent in whose

name a property was registered sue to recover the said
property through the institution of an ordinary civil
action, such as a complaint for reconveyance and
partition, or nullification of transfer certificate of titles and
other deeds or documents related thereto, this Court
has consistently ruled that a declaration of heirship is
improper in an ordinary civil action since the matter is
"within the exclusive competence of the court in a
special proceeding”;2

b. But in some cases, the Court have recognized that a

prior inheritance case is not necessary to recognize an
heir’s rights to a property. This is especially true in the
case of a compulsory heir wherein the legal rights of a
compulsory heir are transmitted to her at the moment of
the decedent’s death by operation of law; 3

c. However, in the case are bar, the Plaintiffs are not the
compulsory heirs of the late Hyun Bin as they are
neither a child or descendant nor a parent or ascendant
of the late Hyun. Hence, they have to be declared first
as heirs of the late Hyun in a special proceeding which
is not proper in the case filed. As they are not real
parties in interest, the case is dismissible for failure to
state a cause of action;

d. Furthermore, the Defendants had already acquired the

subject property by virtue of acquisitive prescription.
Article 1137 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines
provides that ownership and other real rights over
immovable also prescribe through uninterrupted
adverse possession thereof for thirty years, without
need of title or of good faith. The uninterrupted adverse
possession of the predecessors-in-interest of the
Defendant over the subject property started when a tax
declaration has been issued in the name of Siri back in
1978. The possession was adverse as Siri acted in the

2
Reyes v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 162956, April 10, 2008
3
Raymundo vs. Vda. De Suarez, G.R. No. 149017, November 28, 2008
Civil Case No. 12345 Page 4 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim and Crossclaim
Heirs of Hyun Bin v. Queen’s Choice Corporation, et. al.
x---------------------------------------------/

concept of an owner since then. The tax declaration was

under his name and he subsequently donated such
property to Perla, who also held the property in an
adverse possession at the time she applied for the free
patent over the subject lot.

By way of Counterclaim, Defendant alleges that:

7. By virtue of this unwarranted and malicious act initiated by the

Plaintiffs, Defendant were forced to engage counsel in the
sum of P100,000.00;

8. Similarly, the Plaintiff’s unfounded suit has caused Defendant

suffering and public humiliation, for which for which the
Defendant claims moral damages of P50,000.00.

By way of Crossclaim, Defendant alleges that:

9. In the event Plaintiffs are awarded judgment against this

answering Defendant, the latter is entitled for reimbursements
from Defendant Perla the purchase price of the land and also
for indemnity for damages and attorney’s fees.

Presentation of Evidence

Annex 1: Certified true copy of the Certificate of Title Issued under

the name of Perla Bon for Lot A-1
Annex 2: Copy of the Deed of Donation by Siri Bin to Perla Bon
Annex 3-1 to Annex 3-3: Copies of the Tax Declarations of Lot A-1
under the name of Perla Bon for the years 1992 to 1994
Annex 4-1 to Annex 4-25: Copies of the Tax Declarations of Lot A-1
under the name of Queen’s Choice Corporation for the
years 1995 to 2020

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, answering Defendant

respectfully prays to the Honorable Court that:

1. The complaint be dismissed against the answering

Defendant;

2. The Defendant be awarded the amount of P100,000 as

Attorney’s Fees and P50,000 for moral damages;
Civil Case No. 12345 Page 5 of 5
Answer with Counterclaim and Crossclaim
Heirs of Hyun Bin v. Queen’s Choice Corporation, et. al.
x---------------------------------------------/

3. Defendant Perla Bon be ordered to pay the answering

Defendant the purchase price that the latter has paid and also
for indemnity of damages and attorney’s fees in the event
Plaintiffs are awarded a judgment against the answering
Defendant;

Other Relief, just and equitable are also prayed for.

ATTY. MARY MAE E. LIMPANGUG

Counsel for Defendant Queen’s Choice Corporation
4th floor, EH Building, Dr. J.P Rizal Street, Carcar City, Cebu
Roll of Attorney No. 12345
PTR No. 1234567, 01/27/2020, Carcar City
IBP No. 1324657, 02/15/2020, Cebu Province
MCLE Compliance No. VII-0234561
E-Mail Address: marymaelimpangug@gmail.com
Tel. No. (02) 225-8023

Copy furnished through Personal Service:

ATTY. JUAN DELA CRUZ

Counsel for Plaintiffs
3rd floor, ABC Building,
Dr. J.P Rizal Street, Carcar City, Cebu