Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Judicial Capital Region
Branch 223, Quezon City

IN RE: CANCELLATION OF
ANNOTATION/LIEN PURSUANT
TO SEC.7 R.A. 26 ANNNOTATED
AT THE BACK OF TRANSFER
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO.
004-2013011974 OF THE REGISTRY
OF DEEDS OF QUEZON CITY,

LRC Case No. R-QZN-15-02689

JOSE FERDINAND R. GUIANG

married to MARLENE G. GUIANG,
Petitioner.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Petitioner JOSE FERDINAND R. GUIANG and MARLENE G.

GUIANG, by counsel, most respectfully state:

1. On 7 June 2017 petitioner personally secured a copy of the

Order of this Honorable Court dismissing this instant petition
without prejudice, by reason of non-compliance by the petitioners to
the 28 November 2016 Order.

2. The Order dated 28 November 2016 directed petitioners

to show cause why this instant petition should not be dismissed for
failure to comply with the Court’s Order dated 1 August 2016.

3. On 24 January 2017, Petitioner Jose Ferdinand Guiang,

submitted to this Honorable Court a letter-compliance, which
provides:
“ x x x In compliance to COURT ORDER
dated November 28, 2016, the exact address of the
property covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No.
004-2013011974 of the Registry of Deeds of Quezon
City is Lot 4 Block 2 Metropoli Drive, E.Rodriguez Jr.,
Ave., Bgry. Bagumbayan, Quezon City.1 x x x”

1
Letter Compliance dated 24 January 2017
 Motion
Reference No. 16-6048/16-5561/BA 1605-01409
Page 2 of 4

4. The documents executed by the Quezon City

government’s Geodetic Engineer and the Office of the Barangay,
Bgry. Balingasa, where the subject property is located, and submitted
before this Honorable Office, clearly show that complainant has no
cause of action. He miserably failed to prove that:

“WHEREFORE,
“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the relief sought by the
petitioner is denied. The above-captioned petition is
DISMISSED.”

5. As comprehensively discussed in the Position Paper

(dated 14 December 2016,) records reveal that the proposed fence
subject of the application will not affect the 5-meter right of way.

“ x x x The verified existing road from Bonifacio

Avenue to the interior lots measured with 10 meters
wide more or less, which the proposed fence aligned
(on the boundary road) on boundary line of the above
mentioned lots (portion), therefore there is a
remaining actual right-of-way on these particular
adjacent lots with 5 meters wide more or less, x x
x2”

6. The documents executed by the Quezon City

government’s Geodetic Engineer and the Office of the Barangay,
Bgry. Balingasa, where the subject property is located, and submitted
before this Honorable Office, clearly show that complainant has no
cause of action. He miserably failed to prove that:

a. the (dominant) estate is surrounded by other

immovables and is without adequate outlet to a public
highway;
b. after payment of the proper indemnity;
c. the isolation was not due to the proprietor's own acts;
and
d. the right of way claimed is at a point least prejudicial
to the servient estate.

7. It bears stressing that contrary to the complainant’s bare

allegations that “there will be absolutely no more access to the public
highway,” the report dated 4 October 2016, executed by Geodetic
Engr. (GE) Florante S. Abad, states that there is an existing 10 meter

2
Report dated 4 October 2016, executed by Geodetic Engr. (GE) Florante S. Abad.
 Motion
Reference No. 16-6048/16-5561/BA 1605-01409
Page 3 of 4

road and with the proposed fence subject of this application, there
shall remain a 5-meter actual right of way.

8. Notably, the fencing permit application had been

submitted in March 2016 or more than a year ago. Likewise, it had
been almost 4 months from the time this complaint had been deemed
submitted for resolution and the inordinate delay in the resolution of
this complaint may be construed as partiality of this Honorable
Office against respondent.

9. It must be emphasized that the delay in resolving the

complaint results in the undue delay of the issuance of the fencing
permit in favor of the respondent, thereby violating his constitutional
right over his property.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this instant

complaint be dismissed for lack of cause of action and for utter lack
of merit and the Fencing Permit Application be Granted, without
unnecessary delay.

Other relief just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

Mandaluyong City for Quezon City, 3 April 2017.

CRYSTAL I. PRADO
Counsel for Petitioner
Ground Floor, State Centre II,
Ortigas Avenue, Mandaluyong City
Roll No. 57242
IBP No. 1051602; 01/03/17; Quezon City
PTR No. 3863270; 01/06/17; QuezonCity
MCLE Compliance No. V-0017191; 03/28/16
Contact No. (02) 722-5811 to 15

NOTIFICATION
 Motion
Reference No. 16-6048/16-5561/BA 1605-01409
Page 4 of 4

FROILAN G. CLEMENTE, JR.

1040 A. Bonifacio Ave., Quezon City

GREETINGS:

Please take notice that the undersigned will submit the foregoing
motion immediately upon receipt of this Honorable Office.

CRYSTAL I. PRADO

EXPLANATION

Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedures,

copy of the foregoing pleading was served on the other party via registered
mail because of lack of available personnel to serve the same personally.

CRYSTAL I. PRADO