Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Opposition to the Motion Order of Demolition
Opposition to the Motion Order of Demolition
1. A copy of the Order dated 25th day of September 2023 was relayed to
the undersigned counsel on September 29, 2023 setting a hearing of
the Motion for Writ of Demolition on October 19, 2023 at 1:30 pm.
3. In Rubio v. MTCC (G.R. No. 87110, January 24, 1996), the Court held:
“The rule that once a judgment has become final and executory, it is the
ministerial duty of the courts to order its execution, is not absolute but
admits of certain exceptions, as in cases of special and exceptional
nature where it becomes imperative in the higher interest of justice
to suspend its execution; or whenever it is necessary to accomplish the
aims of justice or when certain facts and circumstances transpired
Page 1 of 4
after the judgment became final which render the execution of the
judgment impossible or unjust.” (emphasis added)
7. However, after the judgment of this instant case became final and
executory and a writ of execution has been issued by the Honorable
Court, the heirs of of Lucas Balansag was able to retrieve and
provided defendant Samuel M. Claro a copy of Confirmation of
Previous Oral Agreement executed by the heirs Vicente Soriano
namely: Federico Soriano and Charlita Soriano Valle, confirming that
Vicente Soriano waived, transferred, and conveyed a one (1) hectare
or Ten Thousand (10,000) square meters portion of Lot No. 1344 to
his nephew Lucas Balansag sometime in 1940. A copy of
Confirmation of Previous Oral Agreement is attached in the criminal
complaint as Annex “C”.
Page 2 of 4
8. Impliedly, aside from the heirs of Vicente Soriano and Tillope
Boaqueńa who are relatives of Tillope Boaqueńa, there are also other
heirs of Vicente Soriano and Tillope Boaqueńa who are relatives of
Vicente Soriano particularly his siblings Federico Soriano and
Charlita Soriano Valle.
10. Thus, the impression that herein plaintiffs are the ONLY heirs of
spouses Vicente Soriano and Tillope Boaqueńa is NOT true.
12. Therefore, Lot No. 1344 containing an area of One Hundred Twenty
Four Thousand Three Hundred Ten (124,310) square meters,
excluding the Ten Thousand (10,000) square meters portion of Lot
No. 1344 waived, transferred, and conveyed by Vicente Soriano to
his nephew Lucas Balansag, is under the regime of co-ownership of
the concurring heirs: collateral relatives of husband Vicente Soriano
and collateral relatives of wife Tillope Boaqueńa, in this case, the
plaintiffs.
13. Since the claim of the heirs of Lucas Balansag was supported by a
newly discovered evidence Confirmation of Previous Oral
Agreement, the sale made by the heirs of Lucas Balansag to Samuel
M. Claro and other occupants of Lot No. 1344 are valid.
PRAYER
Page 3 of 4
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, it is most respectfully prayed
unto the Honorable Court for the suspension of the issuance of Writ of
Demolition.
Other reliefs, just and equitable under the premises, are likewise
prayed for.
Copy Furnished:
Page 4 of 4