REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

Department of Justice
Office of the Prosecutor
Province of Tarlac

Mr. A
Complainant,

-versus- For: Violation of Section 68

of PD no. 705 as amended,
and further amended by EO
no. 277

Ms. E
Respondent.
x-------------------------------------------x

COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
I, Ms. E, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law,
hereby depose and state that:

1. I, herein respondent, am a Filipino Citizen, of legal age,

with residence at blk 10 lot 10, La Puerta del Sol Subdivision,
Maliwalo, Tarlac City where I can be served with summons, notices
and other processes of this Honorable Office;

2. Complainant, Mr. A, is a Filipino Citizen, of legal age and a

resident of Getha rd, San Sebastian, Tarlac City where he may be
served with summons and other processes of this Honorable Office;

3. On March 2005, respondent acquired the subject property

the property covered by TCT No. 123456 through a deed of
conveyance made and agreed upon by herein respondent and Mrs. B,
the deceased wife of herein complainant. A copy of the Deed of
Conveyance is hereby attached as Annex “A” and made an integral
part hereof;

4. During the negotiation of the said deed of conveyance

between the respondent and Mrs. B, the latter guaranteed that her
husband, Mr. A, consented with the institution of the said Deed of
Conveyance;

5. The cutting of the trees does not need the consent of Mr. A
because, pursuant to the deed of conveyance, the property covered by
TCT No. 123456 is already owned by Ms. E. The fact that the
document is not notarized does not affect the validity of the sale. A
public instrument is not essential for the validity of the deed of
conveyance as ruled by the court in Sorfano v. Latona 1, hence, the
sale is not void ab initio;

6. Well established is the rule that the lawful owner of the real
property also owns everything which is produced thereby, or which is
incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or artificially 2, hence,
respondent being the owner of the principal, also owns the trees found
therein and the allegation of Mr. A that he owns the trees is untenable;

7. It should be noted that the allegations do not constitute an

offense because the consent of Mr. A or even the lawful owner to cut
the trees is immaterial. It is enough that the cutting of the trees was
permitted by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources;

8. Respondent is considered as an innocent purchaser for

value relying on a Torrens title and Mrs. B’s assurance that both she
and her husband agrees to sell the property. It has been held in Cruz v
CA & Suzara3 that every person dealing with registered land may
safely rely on the correctness of the title and the will in no way oblige
him to go behind the certificate to determine the condition of the
property;

9. Mr. A can no longer question the validity of the sale

because Article 96 of the Family Code provides that in case of
disagreement, proper remedy or recourse to the court must be availed
of within five years from the date of the contract implementing such
transaction. Since 5 years had lapsed, Mr. A is now estopped from
questioning the transaction and the answer to the question whether or
not the deed of conveyance bears his signature is now immaterial;

10. Complainant failed to produce any evidence that would

pinpoint Ms. E as the architect of the crime, thus, the respondent is still
presumed innocent. Complainant has the burden to raise a reasonable
suspicion that would warrant the filing of an information, absent such,
like in this case, makes the complaint malicious and baseless;

11. The failure of the complainant to present competent proof

to indict the respondent for the crime mentioned, follows that
complainant also failed to properly inform the respondent with regard
to her participation in the crime, hence, the complaint has no cause of
action and should be outright dismissed;

1
Sorfano v. Latona, L-3408, Dec. 23, 1950
2
Civil Code of the Philippines Article 440
3
Gloria Cruz vs. CA, Romy Suzara, Manuel Vizconde G.R. No. 120122 November 1997

2
 12. Respondent reiterates, repleads and incorporates by
reference all the foregoing insofar as they are material and additionally
submit that it is entitled to reliefs arising from the filing of this malicious
and baseless suit;

13. Respondent is entitled to damages amounting to three

Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php 300,000.00) as moral, exemplary
nominal, temperate, actual and liquidated damages, because her
name and reputation were besmirched by and dragged into this
malicious and baseless suit.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Respondent respectfully

prays that judgment be rendered in her favor by dismissing the
Complaint and granting the Respondent’s counter affidavit by awarding
the Respondent an aggregate amount of three Hundred Thousand
Pesos (Php 300,000.00) as Moral, Exemplary, Nominal, Temperate,
Actual and Liquidated damages.

Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

FURTHER AFFIANTS SAYETH NAUGHT.

________________________
Mr. R
Counsel of respondent

Tarlac City, April 30, 2015.

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that I have personally examined the affiants and

that I am satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood their
Counter-Affidavit and that the contents thereof are true and correct.

3
 VERIFICATION

I, Ms. E, of legal age, Filipino, single, and with address at blk 10

lot 10, La Puerta del Sol Subdivision, Maliwalo, Tarlac City, after
having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, hereby depose and
state that:

I am the Respondent of the case.

I have read the foregoing Counter Affidavit and I confirm that I

have caused the preparation of the same.

I further confirm that the contents of the foregoitng Counter

Affidavit are true and correct based on personal knowledge and
authentic records of the case.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand on this

_________________, 2019 in Tarlac City.

_________________________
Ms. E

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this

_______________________ in Tarlac City, Tarlac, affiant exhibiting to
me her ________________________ as competent proof of her
identity.

Doc No. ___

Page No. ___
Book No. ___
Series of 2019.