Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF DAET

Province of Camarines Norte
Fifth Judicial Region
Rtc.occ000@judiciary.gov.ph
09485948312

Spouses Anton Dela Cruz and Civil Case No.___________

Maria Dela Cruz For: Recovery of Possession
and Damages
vs.

Jay San Juan, Jane San Pedro

Jimmy Roque and
all other persons acting for and
in their behalf, and/or claiming
rights under them.
x----------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW the Plaintiffs, by and through the undersigned

counsel, unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully avers that:
1. The Plaintiffs Spouses Anton and Maria Dela Cruz are of legal
ages, Filipino citizens, with full capacity to sue and be sued, and
residents of Purok 1, Brgy. Matoog-toog, Mercedes, Camarines
Norte. They can be served with notices and other court
processes at their given address or through undersigned counsel,
at the address herein below given;
2. Defendants are all of legal ages, Filipino citizens, with capacity to
sue and be sued, and residents of Purok 2, Brgy. Matoog-toog,
Camarines Norte, where they can be served with summons,
notices and other court processes of this Honorable Court;
3. Plaintiffs are the registered owners of Lot No. 3341, Pls-793 with
an area of 21,879 square meters, located in Brgy. Matoog-toog,
Mercedes, Camarines Norte covered under Original Certificate of
Title No. P-69103 of the Registry of Deeds of Daet, Camarines

1|Page
 Norte, a certified true photocopy of which is attached as Annex
“A” and is made as an integral part hereof;
4. Plaintiffs acquired the title of the subject property by virtue of
Free Patent No.021519-92-3194 attached as Annex “B” hereof;
5. Plaintiff Anton Dela Cruz inherited Lot No.3341 from his father
Lorenzo after the latter died intestate on May 2, 1992 and an
Extra-judicial settlement of the estate was executed by the
children of Spouses Lorenzo Dela Cruz and Eleanor Dela Cruz
namely Anton Dela Cruz, Primitiva Dela Cruz-Asis and Fermina
Dela Cruz-Alonzo dated June 2, 1992 attached as Annex “C”;
6. The extra-judicial settlement of estate specifically named Anton
Dela Cruz to receive in full the 21,879 square meters, identified
as Lot No.3341, located at Brgy. Matoog-toog, Mercedes,
Camarines Norte (Annex “C”);
7. After registering the land in July 1992, Plaintiffs planted several
fruit-bearing trees, constructed a 120 square meter house and
installed a concrete and cyclone wire perimeter fence around the
subject property. Anton continuously cultivated the land and
established their family home on the said lot in 1992.
Photographs of which were attached as Annex “D to D-2”;
8. Plaintiffs religiously paid real estate taxes due thereon up to the
present as shown by certified true copies of the Tax Declarations
attached herein (Annex “E to E-20”);
9. Plaintiffs father Lorenzo Dela Cruz was one of the heirs of the
late Genaro Dela Cruz who was the first owner of Lot No.3341
who lived and cultivated and occupied Lot No. 3341 along with
his parents and his sister Irene Dela Cruz since time immemorial;
10. After the death of Genaro Dela Cruz in 1962, the land was
transferred to the heirs’ Irene and Lorenzo, however, Irene
showed no interest in the said land and executed a notarized
partition agreement dated August 17, 1962 with Lorenzo for the
properties of their father attached as Annex “F”;

2|Page
11. Lorenzo’s family were in open, continuous, notorious and
exclusive possession in the concept of an owner of the 21,879
square meters lot since 1962. A survey was conducted by Engr.
Mila Andres in 1989 showing the meets and bounds of Lot 3341
which was herein attached as Annex “ G”;
12. Sometime in 1970, Juanita Roque-San Lorenzo , Demetria
Roque-Vicente, Pantaleon Roque and Jimmy Roque, the heirs of
Irene Dela Cruz pleaded to the plaintiffs father that they be
allowed to occupy a small portion of the land, hence, Lorenzo
agreed and offered them almost 5,000 square meters of land to
cultivate with the agreement that they will share the proceeds of
their harvest on an 80:20 ratio, wherein the 20% of the profit will
be given to plaintiff’s father Lorenzo, moreover, they agreed that
they will immediately vacate the area once the need arises;
13. Sometime in 1970, defendants Jay San Juan and Jane San
Pedro were introduced to the plaintiffs’ father as workers of the
siblings Juanita, Demetria, and Pantaleon, hence they were
allowed and tolerated by Lorenzo to stay on the land along with
his nephew Jimmy Roque with the condition that they will still give
20% of the profits and will peacefully vacate the lot if needed by
the plaintiff’s family;
14. The relationship between the plaintiffs and defendants was well
entrenched as the plaintiff grew together with the children of the
defendants. Herein attached as Annex “H-H-20” are the
photographs of the defendants’ family on various occasions with
the plaintiffs’ family;
15. However, the defendants stopped giving the shares of the fruits
of the harvest to the plaintiffs after Lorenzo’s demise in 1992, but
promised that they will give the plaintiffs their share once they
gain sufficient profit considering that their children were still
studying;

3|Page
 PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

16. Several years passed, but the Defendants miserably failed to

fulfill their promise to the Plaintiffs. The latter previously made
several verbal demands to the defendants in 2005 but the
defendants pleaded that they be given more time as the
supposed shares were being used as capital for another
business venture, and once again promised that they will give an
equitable share of the profits to herein plaintiffs;
17. However, in 2015, when plaintiff Anton verbally demanded for
the payment of his share, the defendants suddenly aggressive
and proclaimed that they will not give anything to Anton because
they are co-owners of the property;
18. Defendants Jay San Juan and Jane San Pedro claimed that
they own 2,520 square meters and 210 square meters
respectively which they bought from Juanita, Demetria, and
Pantaleon while Jimmy Roque asserts that he owns 1,690
square meters as an heir of Irene;
19. Despite numerous demands for them to vacate, defendants
remained in illegal possession of the said land up to the present
and still retain such possession. Attached as Annex “I-I-15” are
the demand letters duly received by the defendants;
20. A final demand letter to vacate dated July 17, 2021 was
received by each of the defendants on July 30, 2021, but they
still refused to surrender the lot to the plaintiffs, and even
became more aggressive as the plaintiffs were prohibited from
entering the portion of the lot the defendants illegally occupy;
21. Plaintiffs confronted Defendants before the Office of the
Punong Barangay of Matoog-toog, Mercedes, Camarines Norte
on August 5, 2022. However, no settlement was reached during
the barangay conciliation proceeding since the defendants were
too adamant with their claim over the subject lot, as a result

4|Page
 thereof the Minutes and Certificate to File Action dated August
18, 2022 was issued (Annex “J and J-2”);
22. Despite being given time to reconsider their position, the
defendants obstinately and unlawfully refused to vacate the
subject property, as well as to remove the illegal structures
thereon, much to the damage and prejudice of herein plaintiffs.
Thus, defendants have unjustly and continuously deprived
plaintiffs of their legal right to possession and enjoyment of the
subject property;
23. Plaintiffs filed this action as the owners of the above-described
property pursuant to Article 428 of the Civil Code of the
Philippines which states, among others, that the owner has "a
right of action against the holder and possessor of the thing in
order to recover it."
24. Accordingly, while possession by tolerance is lawful, such
possession becomes illegal upon demand to vacate is
made by the owner and the possessor by tolerance refuses to
comply with such demand (Prieto v. Reyes 14 SCRA 432; Yu v.
De Lara, 6 SCRA 786,788; Isidro v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
105586, December 15,1993);
25. A person who occupies the land of another at the latter’s
tolerance or permission without any contract between them,
is necessarily
bound by an implied promise that he will vacate upon
demand (Yu v. DeLara, supra cited in Sumulong v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 108817,May 10, 1994);
26. The defendants’ continued possession of the subject property
despite several demands to vacate is patently illegal, and a
blatant violation of plaintiff’s rights and title thereto;
27. Being registered owners of the subject property; plaintiffs should
be placed in possession thereof, and defendants should be

5|Page
 ordered to vacate the subject lot as soon as possible in order to
prevent further damage on the part of the plaintiffs;

PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

28. In order to protect plaintiff’s interests, defendants should be

made to pay reasonable compensation for their continued illegal
use and occupation of the subject property for failure to pay the
promised share in the amount of Php 1,000.00 per month, from
June 1992 until the subject property is actually vacated, and their
illegal structures removed, which amount should be consigned
with this Honorable Court;
29. In order to protect their rights and interests, plaintiffs were
constrained to hire the services of counsel for the amount of Php
50,000.00. Official receipt dated August 19, 2022 attached as
Annex “K”;
30. Plaintiffs are likewise expected to incur not less than Php
10,000.00 in litigation expenses for which defendants should be
liable to pay (Annex “L”;.

WITNESSES AND SUMMARIES OF THEIR INTENDED

TESTIMONIES

31. To prove their claims in this Complaint, the plaintiffs’ will be

presenting the following witnesses:
a. Anton Dela Cruz who will testify to prove all the material
allegations in this Complaint to recover the possession of the
lot subject matter of this case and their entitlement to the
damages they seek. He will likewise identify relevant
documents and other object documents. The Judicial
Affidavit of Mr. Anton Dela Cruz is hereto attached as Annex
“M”;

6|Page
 b. Maria Dela Cruz who will testify to corroborate all the
material allegations in this Complaint and their entitlement to
damages they seek. She will likewise identify relevant
documents and other object documents. The Judicial
Affidavit of Ms. Maria Dela Cruz is hereto attached as Annex
“N”;
c. Jose Abad the eldest worker of the late Lorenzo Dela Cruz
will prove that Spouses Dela Cruz were in possession of the
lot since time immemorial and that defendants’ possession of
the lot subject of this case was merely by tolerance. The
Judicial Affidavit of Ms. Jose Abad is hereto attached as
Annex “O”;
d. Arnulfo Vedad, the caretaker of the lot to prove that the
demand letter was received by the defendants. The Judicial
Affidavit of Mr. Arnulfo Vedad is hereto attached as Annex
“P”;
e. Such other witnesses as will be indispensable to contest
possible defenses of the defendant, whose testimony will be
presented only when necessary;

DOCUMENTS AND OBJECT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE

ALLEGATIONS

The Plaintiffs submit the following documentary and object

evidence to support these allegations:
1. Exhibit “A”- Original Certificate of Title No. P-69103;
2. Exhibit “B”- Free Patent No.021519-92-3194;
3. Exhibit “C”- Extra-judicial settlement of estate dated June 2,
1992;
4. Exhibit “D”- Photographs
5. Exhibit “E to E-20”- Tax Declarations
6. Exhibit “F”- Notarized partition agreement dated August 17,
1962

7|Page
 7. Exhibit “G”- Survey plan dated September 5, 1989
8. Exhibit “H-H-20”- Photographs
9. Exhibit “I”- Demand letter dated July 17, 2021
10. Exhibit “J-J-2”- Minutes of Barangay Conciliation
Proceedings and Certificate to File Action dated August 18,
2022
11.Exhibit “K”-Official Receipt dated August 19, 2022
12.Exhibit “L”-Official Receipt dated August 20, 2022
13.Reserved exhibits for Official Receipt issued by the Court

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable

Court after due notice and hearing, judgment be rendered in favor of
the plaintiffs and order the defendants:
1. to peacefully vacate the subject property and remove
their structures thereon;
2. to consign with this Honorable Court the amount of Php
5,000.00 for every month of their use and occupation of
the subject property, from the filing of this complaint until
the property is actually vacated and the illegal structures
are removed;
3. to pay the plaintiffs, by way of reasonable compensation
for their continued illegal and unlawful use and
occupation of the subject property, from the filing of this
complaint until they shall have vacated the property and
removed their structures therefrom;
4. to pay the plaintiffs, the amount of Php 50,000.00 by way
of moral damages for the sleepless nights and mental
torture caused by the failure of the defendants to give
what is due to the plaintiffs.
5. to pay attorney’s fees in the amount of Php 50,000.00
and by way of appearance fee Php 3,000.00 for every
court appearance;
6. to pay litigation expenses and cost of suit in the amount
of Php 10,000.00;
7. Plaintiffs likewise pray for such other relief as are just and
equitable under the premises.

8|Page
Daet, Camarines Norte August 22, 2022.

ATTY. JUAN SANTOS

Counsel for the Plaintiffs
PTR No. 89352139-01/03/2022
Roll of Atty. No. 672509-05/4/2016
IBP No. 1568235- 02/03/2022
MCLE Compliance No.VII-00235658-11/17/2021
Brgy.II, Daet, Camarines Norte
Mobile No. 09453258632
Email add: juansaints_lawoffice@gmail.com

Manifestation of counsel: The plaintiffs and counsel consent to service by electronic

means, through the email address given above.

9|Page
VERIFICATION & CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

We, the Spouses ANTON DELA CRUZ and MARIA DELA

CRUZ, of legal age, married to each other, and residing at Purok 1,
Brgy. Matoog-toog, Mercedes, Camarines Norte, after having being
sworn in accordance with law, hereby deposes and says that:

1. We are the plaintiff in the above-entitled case, We have

caused the preparation of the above pleadings , have read
all the contents thereof and asserts that all the allegations
therein are true and correct based on our own personal
knowledge and/or authentic documents;
2. This pleading is not filed to harass, cause unnecessary
delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
3. The factual allegations herein have evidentiary support or, if
specifically so identified, will likewise have evidentiary
support after a reasonable opportunity for discovery;
4. We have not theretofore commenced any action or filed any
claim involving the same issues in court, tribunal or quasi-
judicial agency and to the best of my knowledge, no such
other action or claim is pending therein;
5. If we should thereafter learn that the same or similar action
or claim has been filed or is pending, I shall report that fact
to the Court where this case has been filed within five (5)
calendar days from the knowledge thereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed our
th
signature this 19 day of August 2022, Daet, Camarines Norte

ANTON DELA CRUZ MARIA DELA CRUZ

Affiant Affiant
PhilHealth ID No. 1538564 PhilHealth ID No. 65484515

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me in the Municipality of

Daet, Camarines Norte this 19th day of August 2022, by the affiants
who presented to me their valid IDs as mentioned above, issued by
the government containing their signatures and photographs,
competent evidence of their respective identities.

10 | P a g e
 ATTY. JUAN SANTOS
Counsel for the Plaintiffs
PTR No. 89352139-01/03/2022
Roll of Atty. No. 672509-05/4/2016
IBP No. 1568235- 02/03/2022
MCLE Compliance No.VII-00235658-11/17/2021
Notarial Commission No. 2021-9

Doc No. 315

Page No. 65
Book No. 165
Series of 2022

11 | P a g e