You are on page 1of 3

Republic of the Philippines

Regional Trial Court


Sixth Judicial Region
BRANCH 96
Barotac Viejo, Iloilo

TONYO PRITO,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No.:________

For:
- Versus -
Declaration of Nullity of
Real Estate Mortgage

Gardo VALENCIANA,
Defendant.
x--------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, Plaintiff, by the Public Attorney’s Office, to the
Honorable Court, most respectfully states:

THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff is of legal age, widow of Prito, Sr., Filipino, and a resident


of Barangay Tanduyan, Ajax, Iloilo, where she may be served with
summons, orders, and other court processes;

2. Defendant is likewise of legal age, single, Filipino, and a resident of


F. Zulueta Street, Foton, Iloilo, where he may be served with summons,
orders, and other court processes;

FACTS ANTECEDENT TO THE FILING OF THE COMPLAINT

3. Prito, Sr. is an owner of a parcel of land covered by Transfer


Certificate of Title No. T-195988 Located at Tanduay, Ajuy, Iloilo, more
particularly described as follows:

“A parcel of land (Lot 75 of the subdivision plan Psd-63062,


sheet 2, being a portion of Parcel 2 of Tanduyan Estate as described in
T.C.T. No. 4781, L.R.C. Record No. ) situated in the Barrio of Tanduyan,
Municipality of Ajuy, Province of Iloilo. Containing an area of EIGHTEEN
Page |2

THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY THREE (18, 583) SQUARE


METERS.”

A copy of the Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-195988 is hereto


attached as Annex “A”;

4. Sometime on October 1, 2007, the aforementioned property was


used as a property bond in a case entitled, People of the Philippines versus
Rena Espinosa;

5. Rene Espinya, the accused in the above-mentioned case, is a


daughter of Prito, Sr. and herein plaintiff Tonyo Prito;

6. Time passed without knowledge by the plaintiff and her husband


that their title, used as a property bond, was released by the court due to
the dismissal of the case against their daughter Rena Espinosa;

7. However, it recently came to the attention of herein plaintiff that


their property covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-195988 was
allegedly mortgaged by her husband Prito, Sr., with her conformity, to one
Mr. Valenciana on March 15, 2010. A copy of the Real Estate Mortgage is
attached herewith as Annex “B”;

8. To verify the information, plaintiff decided to meet with herein


defendant and she found out that defendant was in possession of the
original copy of Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-195988. Ultimately,
plaintiff demanded that defendant return the original copy of their title but
defendant refused to do so because he insists that plaintiff should also
return the Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php 250, 000.00) he paid
by virtue of the Real Estate Mortgage contract the defendant allegedly
executed together with Prito, Sr. and with plaintiff’s conformity;

9. Plaintiff explained to the defendant that she and her husband did
not execute the Real Estate Mortgage considering that it was the first time
plaintiff met the defendant and it is impossible that her husband could have
executed and signed the said Real Estate Mortgage contract on March 15,
2010 because Prito, Sr. was already dead at that time. As proof, plaintiff
even showed defendant a photocopy of the Certificate of Death of her
husband but defendant still refused to give her the original of TCT No. T-
17625. A copy of the Certificate of Death of Prito, Sr., who died on April 17,
2008, issued by the National Statistics Office is hereto attached as Annex
“C” and forms an integral part of this complaint;

10. Despite plaintiff’s explanation and efforts to retrieve the original


copy of their title, defendant did not and still continues to refuse to return
the original copy of Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-195988, thus, leaving
plaintiff no other recourse but to file the instant complaint for Declaration
of Nullity of Real Estate Mortgage;
Page |3