Republic of the Philippines MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT Branch 11 Janiuay, Iloilo

SPOUSES JOSE RAMIREZ AND ROSE RAMIREZ Plaintiff, -versus-

CIVIL CASE NO. 123

For: FORCIBLE ENRTY ABEL ISOG, AND CAIN ISOG Defendants. X------------------------X

POSITION PAPER (for the Defendants)

Defendants,

thru

undersigned

counsel,

most

respectfully submits this position paper and avers, that:

Nature of this Case

This is an action for Forcible Entry commenced by the Plaintiff Spouses Jose Ramirez and Rose Ramirez against the defendants Abel Isog and Cain Isog. The subject matter of this action is a piece of land identified as Lot No. 2-E-7 situated at Baranggay Patongpatong, Janiuay, Iloilo under OCT No.111111 issued in the name of the late Abe Isog registered in the Registry of Deeds of Iloilo City.

. A. 2011 the defendants received a summon from the Municipal Court of Janiuay to answer for a complaint filed against them for forcible entry. 2010 the defendants Ramirez and were Rose surprised Ramirez plaintiff spouses Jose approached informed them that they were the lawful owners of the land and they acquired it through a sale because their mother never sold the said property when she was alive. That as early 2002. to took and possession property 2-E-7 constructed a nipa hut thereon. On that December 12. the defendants of Abel the Isog and Cain under Isog Lot begun No.2002. 2011 the defendant thru the undersigned counsel filed an answer to the complaint.Facts of the Case The property was owned by Abe Isog as shown in the Certificate of Title under OCT No. That on April 30. 111111 attached hereto as Annex. and the became the owner of the said automatically property by way of intestate succession for the reason that they are the legal heirs of Abe Isog. The said Abe Isog was the mother of the defendants Abel Isog and Cain Isog. On December 10. Abe Isog died in a car accident which is evident in the Certificate of defendants Death attached hereto as Annex B. And on December 14.

Issues 1. intimidation. Iloilo. 2. In the case of Reyes vs. Patong-patong. This would only show that defendants was in a threat of losing the subject land which they lawfully inherited from their mother Abe Isog who already died. In this case there is no deprivation was made by the defendant on the plaintiff because the property was already in the possession of defendant and the plaintiff only claim such land in December 2010 base on allegation of sale between them and allege Noah Isog. Sta. Maria the . threat. 2-E-7 located at the Brgy. Whether or not the defendants have rightfully owned the property under Lot No. Discussion On the first above stated issue the defendants cannot be ejected on the subject land for the reason that for forcible entry to attach the following circumstance must concur: (a) that the person is deprived of his property. strategy or stealth. Whether or not the defendants can be ejected by forcible entry under Rule 70 Section 1 of the Revised the Rules of Court. Janiuay. Moreover the plaintiff has never in possession of such land from the time it was acquired by the defendants. and (c) such person has real title over such property. (b) that such deprivation is due to force.

parents. they automatically become the owner of the land which was registered to Abe Isog. The Civil Code provides that legal or intestate succession takes place: If aperson dies without a will. This would clearly show that the property was lawfully acquired by the defendants Abel Isog and Isaac Isog. the deceased Abe Isog. The answer is in the affirmative for the reason that they validly inherited such property by way of legal or intestate succession through representation of their dead father Noah Isog. if she left without a will. ascendants or descendants. Possession de facto and not possession de jure is the only issue in a forcible entry case. It was provided in the Civil Code that The primary heirs of the deceased. will automatically inherit the properties owned by the deceased. her children. or one which has subsequently lost its validty…. They have lawful and just title over such property as provided by law and for that reason they cannot be ejected on the subject parcel of land. On the second issue on whether the defendants have a valid title or right over the ownership of the property subject of this case.” This would simply means that plaintiff had never in possession of the property as one of the elements of forcible entry.Supreme Court held that “ Possession de facto is the physical possession of real property. the mother of the defendants died in a car accident and left them without any will. but only but only prior physical possession. Title is never an issue. or a void will. .In this case.

Recommendation WHEREFORE. 98765 Lifetime Member PTR no. ANDREO Counsel For the Defendants Copy furnished: Atty. FANTILANAN Counsel Brgy. JAHZIEL P. San Agustin Iloilo City IBP no. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Iloilo City Philippines. December 14. 2011 CHARLENE G. either in fact or in law. 2012 . it most respectfully prayed this Honorable Court that the instant Case of Forcible Entry shall be dismissed for want of basis. premises considered. 12345 January 30.

I must state the status of the same. no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court. Filipinos.S. Philippines. 1. Book No. the Court of Appeals.VERIFICATION REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES) CITY OF ILOILO ) S. Iloilo. that we have read and understood the allegations contained therein. that we have caused the foregoing position paper to be prepared. the Court of Appeals or agency. Series of 2011. Page No. . Abel and Cain Isog. Maasin. proceeding That if I should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court. after having been duly sworn to in accordance with the law. That if there is such other action or pending. I undertake to promptly inform the aforesaid courts and such other tribunal or agency of that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the Court or agency wherein the original pleading and sworn certification contemplated herein have been filed. Abel Isog TIN No. and that the same are true and correct to the behest of our own personal knowledge and based on authentic records. or any tribunal or agency. 342-343 Cain Isog TIN No. 1. at Iloilo City. hereby depose and say : That we are defendants in the above entitled case. 1242-343 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 14th day of December 2011. residents of Barangay Ova Etsa. That to the best of my knowledge. x---------------------------------x We. CHARLENE ANDREO Notary Public Doc No. I. all of legal age.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.