REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT

X x x CITY
BRANCH x x x

X x x,
Plaintiff
Civil Case No. xxx
- Versus –
Unlawful Detainer
Xx x, etc.,
Defendants.
x---------------------------------x

ANSW ER
(In re: Summons, Received on
xxx 2011)

The DEFENDANT xxx, by counsel, respectfully states:

I. ANSWER

1. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Complaint are admitted.

2. Paragraphs 2 to 6 of the Complaint are denied for lack of knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity thereof,
the allegations therein being matters known only to, and are within the
control only, of the plaintiff.

3. Paragraphs 7 to 9 of the Complaint are admitted.

4. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint is denied for lack of knowledge and
information sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity of the
alleged amounts of attorney’s fees agreed upon between the plaintiff and
her lawyer. The said paragraph is likewise denied insofar as it alleges that
the defendant has no basis or justification to occupy the subject property,
the truth being those alleged in the special and affirmative defenses part
hereinbelow.

II. SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

5. The title to and ownership in fee simple over the subject property is in the
name of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), its registered
owner, and not the plaintiff. (See Annex “A”, Par. 3, Complaint).

6. The plaintiff is not “the owner” in fee simple of the subject property,
contrary to her allegation in Par. 3 of the Complaint.

7. The alleged Deed of Conditional Sale between the GSIS and the plaintiff
is not annotated on the title on the property. (See dorsal side of the title of
the property, marked as Annex “A”, Par. 3, Complaint).

8. Although the GSIS has given the plaintiff the right of possession of the
property under Par. 4 © of the Deed of Conditional Sale (Annex “B”, Par.
4, Complaint), the plaintiff knew or was supposed to know or was deemed
by law to be obligated to know and to investigate the fact that at the time
of her purchase of the property, the xxx Family were in possession of the
property and that it had a vested, beneficial and equitable right thereto by
reason of Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) executed in 1975 between
its original purchaser xxx, represented by xxx, on the one hand, and the
matriarch of the xxx Family, i.e., xxx, on the other.
A copy of the said MOA is attached as Annex “1”.
A copy of the Special Power of Attorney of xxx (1974) is attached as
Annex “2” hereof.

9. Since 1975 up to the present time, the xxx Family has been in possession
of the subject property by reason of the said MOA. This fact was known to
plaintiff when she investigated the background property until the time she
closed her purchase thereof with the GSIS. There is no proof that plaintiff
had reported the real situation of the property to the GSIS for a solution or
 amicable settlement between the parties prior to her purchase thereof.
Likewise, the GSIS did not send any investigator to investigate the
situation of the property prior to and at the time of its sale to the plaintiff.
It did not issue any formal notice to the defendant or the xxx Family about
the impending attempt of the plaintiff to purchase the property. Had the
xxx Family been notified thereon, they would have taken urgent steps to
acquire the same instead of the plaintiff.

10. In 2002, Sps. xxx, the parents of the herein defendant xxx, executed a
Special Power of Attorney in favor of the herein defendant, a copy of
which is marked as Annex “3” hereof.
11. The defendant had answered the demanded letter, dated xxx 2011, of the
plaintiff through a letter, dated xxx 2011, of defendant’s counsel, a copy of
which is attached as Annex “4” hereof. It requested plaintiff’s lawyer for a
special conference to discuss a serious extrajudicial compromise, without
admission of guilt on the part of the defendant. It was not formally
answered by the plaintiff.

12.GSIS is an (if not “the”) indispensable party in the suit being the registered
owner in fee simple of the subject property. The ownership rights of
plaintiff under her unannotated Deed of Conditional Sale with the GSIS
are merely inchoate and contingent. The Complaint shows no Board
Resolution from the Board of Trustees of the GSIS empowering the
plaintiff to sue the defendant in behalf of the GSIS in the instant case.

III. COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM

13.By reason of the abuse of right committed by the plaintiff and by reason
of the instant precipitate and unfounded suit, the defendant was
constrained to hire the services of a lawyer to defend his rights and
interests for a professional fee of P20,000.00 plus P3,000.00 per court
appearance;

14.Similarly, the plaintiff’s unfounded suit has caused the defendant mental
anguish and suffering and public humiliation and embarrassment, for
which the defendant claims moral damages of P100,000.00.

IV. PRAYER
 WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the parties
be given ample time to reach an amicable settlement before the xxx City Mediation
Center; and that in case of a failure thereof, and after trial, the complaint be dismissed
for lack of merit and the defendant’s compulsory counterclaim be granted, i.e..
attorney’s fees of P20,000.00 plus moral damages of P100,000.00, plus costs of suit.
The defendant respectfully prays for such and other reliefs as may be deemed
just and equitable in the premises.
xxx City, xxx 2011.

LASERNA CUEVA-MERCADER LAW OFFICES

Counsel for Defendant xxx
Unit 15, Star Arcade, C.V Starr Avenue
Philamlife Village, Las Pinas City 1740

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.

Xxx

VERIFICATION
AND
ANTI-FORUM SHOPPINFG CERTIFICATION

I, xxx, of legal age, married, Filipino, and with postal address c/o xxx,
Barangay xxx, xxx Village, xxx, xxx City, under oath, depose:
I am the defendant in the foregoing case; that I caused the preparation of the
foregoing Answer; that I have read its contents; and that the same are true and correct
of my own direct, personal knowledge.
Further, pursuant to Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and existing
Supreme Court circulars, I hereby certify that I have not heretofore commenced any
other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court
of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency; that to the best of my knowledge, no such
action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any
other tribunal or agency; and that if I should hereafter learn that other similar or
related actions or proceedings has been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court,
the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to report that fact
within five (5) days therefrom to this court.
 xxx City, xxx 2011.

Xxx
Affiant/Defendant
SSS Member ID No.
xxx
Issued on xxx 1975

SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me in xxx City on xxx 2011, the affiant
showing his SSS Member ID Card as stated above as competent proof of his identity.

NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No. ____

Page No. ____
Book No. ____
Series of 2011

Cc :

Atty. Xxx
Counsel for Plaintiff
xxx Rm. xxx
xxx Bldg.
Brgy. xxx, xxx City
Metro Manila
Reg. Rec. No.
 Date PO

EXPLANATION

A copy of this pleading is served via registered mail, instead of via personal
service, on the adverse counsel due to the distance of his law office address and the
lack of field staff of undersigned counsel at this time.

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.