Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Region

Metropolitan Trial Court
Branch 49, Caloocan City

NORMAN VELASQUEZ,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No.: 22-32040
For:Accion Reinvindicatoria
and Recovery of
Possession
-versus-

AILEEN DALANON, JUDITH

REGALADO, JOCELYN
MACARAEG, and all person
claiming rights under their
name,
Defendants.
x-----------------------------------x

AMENDED PRE-TRIAL BRIEF

DEFENDANTS, AILEEN DALANON, JUDITH REGALADO AND

JOCELYN MACARAIG, through counsel and unto this Honorable Court most
respectfully submits this Pre-Trial Brief, as follows:

I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND RELIEFS PRAYED FOR

1. The Defendants have been in open continuous and notorious

possession of the property in the concept of an owner since 2007. During
that time, the mother of Aileen Dalanon, Salome Fajardo Rabe was
allowed to reside in the said property by the owner, Don Anacleto Madrigal
Acopiado. The property was then undeveloped, uninhabited, almost a
dumpsite. For years, defendants developed the property, fenced it and
made the property livable. Since then defendants have been living in the
property peacefully and undisturbed.
 2. That at that time the plaintiff represented to be the owner of
the property, defendants are already peacefully occupying the subject
property. If they are the owners of the property, how is it that they did
not make their ownership known to the defendants in 2007?

3. In July 2019, A person in the name of Marion Escobar

approached the defendants and represented himself as the owner of the
subject property. Through his then lawyer Atty. Añonuevo, they went to
the barangay 179, Done 16 District III of Caloocan and made
representations that Escobar is the owner and that defendant should
vacate the property.

4. Defendant Macaraig and Regalado acceded to the

representation and was promised the amount of 15,000 and 35,000.00
respectively to vacate the premises. Believing that they are Mr. Escobar is
the true owners, Defendant Macaraig and received 7,500.00 from Mr.
Escobar with the promise that she will vacate the premises after payment
of the balance. The same is true for defendant Regalado, she received
17,500.00 with the promise that after payment of the balance she will
vacate. With respect to defendant Dalanon, however, she asked Mr.
Escobar to present their proof of ownership such as a title, they could not
present any. That several months have passed, the Marion Escobar was
unable to pay the balance of the amount promised as agreed.

5. That in January 18, 2021, Atty. Leo Angelo Miguel R.

Añonuevo sent a demand letter to return the money received for non-
compliance dated August 2019 entered in the Office of the Lupong
Tagapamayapa of Barangay Zone 179, Zone 16, District I, Caloocan City.
Defendants vehemently deny the allegations, there was non-compliance of
the agreement because Marion Escobar failed to present his title to the
property and as well as to pay the balance promised to the defendants.

6. That prior to the representations made by Marion Escobar and

Norman Velasquez, the defendants were informed that the subject
property is part of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 498 registered to Don
Anacleto Madrigal Acopiado. That the real owners of the property is Don
Anacleto Madrigal Acopiado.
 7. In 2007, the real owners of the property, issued defendants to
a Deed of Assignment that allowed them to stay in issued The subject
property is part of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 498. Said title was
upheld in the February 4, 1972 Decision of RTC Br. 111 of Pasay thru the
Honorable Judge Enrique Agana. That defendants will be able to prove its
allegation during the course of the trial as they shall secure
documentations and certifications from various government agencies.

II. WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO AMICABLE SETTLEMENT

Defendants are open to settlement provided it is on just and

reasonable grounds.

III. PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS:

1. That prior to plaintiff’s buying the property, Defendants have

been in open continuous and notorious possession of the property in the
concept of an owner since 2007.

2. That Atty. Añonuevo also represented a person in the name of

Marion Escobar who represented himself as the owner of the subject
property.

3. That the annotation on the memorandum of encumbrances

provided in Sec. 4, Rule 74 of the Rules has not yet expired.

4. That defendants Macaraig and Regalado did not receive any

amount from the plaintiff Norman Velasquez but from Marion Escobar.

5. Defendant Dalanon did not receive any amount from Marion

Escobar nor from Norman Velasquez;

IV. FACTUAL ISSUES / LEGAL ISSUES TO BE TRIED

1. Whether or not the plaintiff may claim absolute

ownership over the property until after two years from notice as
provided for under Section 4, Rule 74 of the Rules of Court;

2. Whether or not the plaintiffs are the true and absolute

owners of the subject property?
 3. Whether or not the plaintiff was unlawfully deprived of
their property?

4. Whether or not the defendants may validly stay in the

subject property by virtue of the Deed of Assignment

V. DOCUMENTS TO BE PRESENTED / MARKED

EVIDENCES

1.Exhibit “1”- Transfer - To prove the Acopiado

Certificate of Title No. 498; Estate has a valid and
existing title.

2.Exhibit “1-A”– Portion in TCT - To prove that the said title

No. 498 showing that the same emanated from OCT 01-4
TCT 498 came from OCT 01-4;

3.Exhibit “2”- Special Power of - To prove that authority of

Attorney dated January 20,
2020;

- To prove that a Decision

with compromise
4.Exhibit “3”- Decision with
agreement has been
Compromise Agreement dated
rendered by the RTC
February 4, 1972;
Branch 111 of Pasay City in
LRC Case NO. 3967-P

- To prove that the decision

5.Exhibit “4” Portion in Exhibit
“C” showing the government
had issued only one land title
OCT No. 01-1;
6.Exhibit “5”- Decision
rendered by Judge Luis Zenon
Q. Maceren of RTC Branch 218,
Quezon City dated 08 April
2016, CC# RQZN-13-00187-
had the Philippine
Government issued only
one title that is OCT No.
01-1
- To prove that the RTC
Quezon City Branch 218
had rendered a Decision in
CC No. RQZN -13-00187-CV
upholding the validity of
 CV; TCT No. 498;

Exhibit “5-A” –Certificate of - To prove that the said case

Finality dated January 15, attain finality.
2020.

- To prove that the Court of

Appeals Case in CA-GR No.
7.Exhibit “6”- CIDG Final 70014 and did not nullify
Report the Decision based on
Compromise rendered by
the RTC Pasay Branch 111
in LRC Case NO. 3957-P

- To prove that the Decision

8.Exhibit “7”- Entry of rendered by the RTC Pasay
Judgment dated June 14, 1972; Branch 111 was rendered
Final and Executory

9.Exhibit “8”- Certification - To prove that there were

issued by the Court of Appeals clarifications conducted
certifying that the Clarificatory - with respect to the
Decision dated November 4, Decision in LRC Case NO.
1975; 3957-P;

10. Exhibit “9”- Certification - To prove the then

issued by the Court of Appeals Honorable Judge Enrique
certifying that the Clarificatory Agana rendered a
Order by Hon. Judge Agana Clarificatory Order to clarify
dated January 19, 1976; matters pertinent to his
Decision;

11. Exhibit “10”- - To prove that an Order was

Certification issued by the Court issued to make
of Appeals certifying that the
Order dated January 19, 1979
12. Exhibit “11”-
Certification issued by the Court - To prove that the Decision
of Appeals certifying that the rendered by the RTC
Third Alias Writ of Execution Branch 111 has issued a
date May 28, 1989 ; Third Alias Writ of
Execution on May 28, 1989.
13. Exhibit “12”- Sheriff’s
Return dated May 4, 1979
issued in Civil Case No. 3957-P
before the Court of First
Instance (CFI) Branch 28 now
Regional Trial Court Branch
111, Pasay City;

14. Exhibit “13”- Electronic To prove that the title of the

copy of Transfer Certificate of defendant is void
Title No 001-2015004360
registered in the name of Allan
dela Cruz Constantino
consisting of three (3) pages

15. Exhibit “14” – Certified - To prove that the title of

True Copy of Decree No. 4974 the property of defendant
consisting of two (2) pages; emanated from a spurious
source;

16. Exhibit “ 15” - Vicinity - To prove that the property

Plan of Lot A under TCT 498 as of plaintiffs is part of the
prepared for by Spouses TCT No. 498;
Leopoldo and Rosalie Marpuri
prepared by Geodetic Engineer
Mariano Flotildes,

17. Exhibit “16”- Deed of - To prove that the Estate of

Assignment and Transfer of Acopiado assigned a parcel
Rights consisting of Two (2) of land to Spouses Marpuri
pages dated January 19, 2018, on January 19, 2018;
consisting of two (2) pages;

18. Exhibit “17”- Deed of - To prove that the Estate of

Assignment and Transfer of Acopiado assigned a parcel
Rights consisting of Two (2) of land to Spouses Marpuri
pages dated December 20, on December 20, 2021;
 2021;

19. Exhibit “18” – The - To prove that the Decision

Decision rendered by the Court
of Appeals in cases CA GR. SP
Nos 70014 and 104604
entitled , Republic of the
Philippines vs. RTC of Pasay
City Branch 111, et al.
promulgated on December 11,
2009;
rendered by the Court of
Appeals did not invalidate
the Decision rendered by
the RTC Pasay Branch 111
in LRC Case NO. 3957-P;

20. Exhibit “19” – Letter To prove that an

Request dated May 1, 2015 investigation was
Letter addressed to General conducted to prove the
Benjamin Magalong CIDG validity of OCT 01-4 and
Director from Executive their derivative titles TCT
Administrator Daniel Frianeza; 498

- To prove that an
21. Exhibit “ 20” - Comments/ investigation was held and
Recommendations re Letter that a report was made
Request of MR. Daniel Frianeza; proving the existence f OCT
01-4 and its derivative titles

- To serve as her testimony

and to prove the material
allegations in her
complaint, to identity
22.Exhibit “21”- Judicial documents in relation to
Affidavit of Aileen Dalanon her complaint;
- To prove that they have
been in open and
continuous occupation over
the property.
-

- To serve as her testimony

23.Exhibit “22” – Judicial and to prove the material
Affidavit of Judith Regalado allegations in her
complaint, to identity
documents in relation to
 her complaint;
- To prove that they have
been in open and
continuous occupation over
the property.
-

To serve as her testimony

and to prove the material
allegations in her
complaint, to identity
documents in relation to
24.Exhibit “23” – Judicial
her complaint;
Affidavit of Jocelyn Macaraeg
To prove that they have
been in open and
continuous occupation over
the property.

25.Exhibit “24” –
Certification dated August 16, - To prove that LRC Case No.
1996 From Court of Appeal 3957-P Of the CFI Branch
28 now Branch 111 of
Exhibit “24-A” –Letter Pasay City was not
dated August 26, 1996 issued appealed to the Court of
by Judicial Record Office of Appeal.
the Supreme Court

Exhibit “ 24-B” –
Certification dated May 22,
2000 from Court of Appeal.

- To serve as his testimony

and to prove the material
26. Exhibit “25” Judicial
allegations in her
Affidavit of Virgilio Pablico.
complaint, to identity
documents in relation to his
complaint;
27. Exhibit “26” Judicial
Affidavit of Orlando Zordilla - To serve as his testimony
and to prove the material
allegations in her
complaint, to identity
 documents in relation to his
complaint;

VI. NAMES OF THE WITNESSES:

Aileen Dalanon - is the defendant herself, she will testify on the

facts, material allegations, and documents involved or related to the
issues raised in her answer.

Judith Regalado- is the defendant herself, she will testify on the

facts, material allegations, and documents involved or related to the
issues raised in her answer.

Jocelyn Macaraig- is the defendant herself, she will testify on the

facts, material allegations, and documents involved or related to the
issues raised in her answer.
Atty. Virgilio Pablico – he will testify on the veracity of the
ownership of the Acopiado over the subject property; He will
identify documents involved or related to the issues being raised in
the defendants defense;

Orlando Sordilla – he is the authorized representative of the

Acopiado. He will identify the documents that will prove the
ownership of the Acopiado

VI. APPLICABLE LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE:

1. Sec. 4, Rule 74 of the Rules of Court

2. P.D. 1529 otherwise known as the Property Registration
Decree.
3. Catindig v. Vda. de Meneses G.R. No. 165851, 656 Phil. 361
(2011).
4. Section 46 of Act No. 496 provides that "[n]o title to
registered land in derogation to that of the registered owner shall be
acquired by prescription or adverse possession."

VII. H. REFERRAL
The defendants submits to the propriety of referral of factual
issues to commissioners as applicable.

VIII. I. RESERVATION
 Defendants, respectfully reserve the right to present additional oral
and documentary evidence as may become necessary in the course of the
trial.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Quezon City. 21 July 2022.

ROSALINDA A. MONTENEGRO
Counsel for the Defendants
Unit 312 ACRE Bldg.
No. 137 Malakas St., Barangay Central, Quezon City
Roll of Attorney's No. 68465
PTR No. 2443144; Issued: 1/03/22; Quezon City
IBP OR No.AR195704/ 1/04/22 -Quezon City
MCLE Compliance No. VII-0021672
Extended until 14 April 2025
ramlawoffice17@gmail.com
Explanation

Copies of this Pre-Trial Brief is personally served to this Honorable

Court, and to the private prosecutor.

Rosalinda A. Montenegro

Copy Furnished:

Atty. Leo Angelo Miguel R. Añonuevo

Añonuevo Law Office
24 First Street, Saint Ignatius Village
1110 Quezon City, Metro Manila