Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES

Ninth Judicial Region
Branch 4
Zamboanga City

JAMES REID, CIVIL CASE NO. 676

- Plaintiff,
-For-
- versus–
EJECTMENT
Kim Chui, Liza Seguera, Brad Pit
-
Defendant.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

JOINT ANSWER

COME NOW, Defendants, Kim Chui, Liza Seguera, and Brad Pit,
through undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully
submits its Answer, and hereby aver that:

1. Paragraph (1) and (2) of the Complaint is ADMITTED;

2. Paragraph (3) thereof is partially ADMITTED only in so far as to the

Plaintiff appearing as the registered owner in the Transfer Certificate
of Title No.T-112,211, and DENIED the validity of Plaintiff’s
ownership as to the subject lot;

3. Paragraphs (4) thereof is specifically DENIED for lack of knowledge

or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of an
allegation;

4. Paragraph (5) is specifically DENIED for herein DEFENDANTS are

in possession of the subject property base upon agreement with
NADINE LUSTRE to cultivate the subject lot and divide the proceeds
thereof, 40% of which in favor of NADINE LUSTRE and with further
agreement to first offer the subject property to us if she would sell the
property ;

5. Paragraph (6) is specifically DENIED for lack of knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of an allegation;

6. Paragraph (8) is specifically DENIED as to the allegation of our

illegal possession of the subject property;

Page 1 of 5
 By way of Affirmative Defense

7. Herein Defendants are rightful possessors of the subject property. We

cultivated the subject property in consideration of our existing agreement
with NADINE LUSTRE to give us the right of possession thereof subject to
60:40 sharing of whatever proceeds for the said cultivation. Furthermore, it
was agreed that if NADINE LUSTRE would sell the property, she would
first offer it to us;

8. We peacefully and rightfully possess the subject property for over 10

years already and it was a surprise for us that one day, PLAINTIFF came
and was claiming the subject property for being the alleged true and
registered owner thereof;

9. The alleged sale of subject property was without our knowledge and
consent. NADINE LUDTRE never even told us about the existence of such
sale neither her only sister, CATRIONA ADJUL, have knowledge about it;

10. The truth and in fact, before NADINE LUSTRE died, she told
CATRIONA ADJUL to take her share in whatever proceeds in the subject
property thus, an implied recognition of our continuous possession in the
subject property;

11. Being the rightful possessor of the subject property for over ten years, it
is deemed proper that our rights thereof shall continually be respected
despite the existence of alleged sale of said subject property. As provided
under Art. 1676 of Civil Code, “The purchaser of a piece of land which is
under a lease that is not recorded in the Registry of Property may terminate
the lease, save when there is a stipulation to the contrary in the contract of
sale, or when the purchaser knows of the existence of the lease (emphasis
ours).” Thus, applying the provision of the law, when the buyer knows the
existence of the lease, he assumes the rights and responsibilities of the
existing lease. It is alleged by the PLAINTIFF himself that during the
alleged sale of subject property, he was informed regarding our possession
thereof and further alleged that it was agreed that NADINE LUSTRE will
inform us to vacate as soon as possible. Yet during the span of period
between the alleged sale up until NADINE LUSTRE died, we were never
informed of such sale neither CATRIONA ADJUL, her only sister and
surviving relative, was informed about it. Thus, it is deemed proper to
consider that when the alleged sale took place between the PLAINTIFF and
NADINE LUSTRE, NADINE LUSTRE assumes the rights and
responsibilities of the existing lease and should therefore respect our rights
as rightful possessors thereof.

COUNTERCLAIM

12. As a result of this baseless complaint, defendants herein were

unnecessarily dragged into court and were constrained to engage the services
Page 2 of 5
of counsel’s Law Office to assist them and have agreed to pay PhP40,000.00
as attorney’s fees and PhP2,000.00 per hearing as appearance fee;

13. Because of the reckless filing of this baseless complaint, done in bad
faith the defendants suffered sleepless nights, besmirched reputation, mental
anguish and great anxiety, social humiliation and wounded feelings for
which plaintiffs should be made to indemnify the defendants in the amount
of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (PHP 100,000.00).

14. Further, because of the foregoing complaint, defendants incurred

litigation expenses, the amount of which is to be proven during the trial;

15. Finally, to serve as deterrent to others who are similarly inclined to

follow the footsteps of the plaintiffs who is bent on unjustly enriching
herself at the expense of another, and for the good of the public in the future,
plaintiffs should be required to pay exemplary damages IN THE AMOUNT
FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (PHP 50,00.00);

Prayer

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that

the Honorable Court resolve to:
a. Dismiss the complaint for lack of merit;
b. Order the plaintiffs to pay the defendants moral damages in the
amount of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (PHP
100,000.00).
c. and exemplary damages IN THE AMOUNT FIFTY THOUSAND
PESOS (PHP 50,00.00);
d. Order the plaintiffs to reimburse the litigation expenses incurred by
the defendants;
e. Order the plaintiffs to pay the amount of PhP40,000.00 as
attorney’s fees and PhP2,000.00 per hearing as appearance fee;
Defendant prays for such other reliefs just and equitable under the
premises.

Zamboanga City, Philippines, March 12, 2019.

KIM CHUI LIZA SEGUERA BRAD PIT

Defendant Defendant Defendant

Page 3 of 5
 Assisted by:

ATTY. PIA WURTZBACH SAMLA

Counsel for Defendant
SAMLA LAW OFFICE
2nd Floor, JJ Bldg., Pilar St., Zamboanga City
PTR No. 1633168-01/03/2019
IBP No. 23856-01/10/2019
Roll No. 49872-05/02/05
MCLE Compliance No. III- 0012177-04/13/10

Copy furnished:

ATTY. JOHN SANTOS

Counsel for Plaintiff
SANTOS Law Office
Zamboanga City

JAMES REID
Plaintiff
RR Street, Baliwasan
Zamboanga City

CLERK OF COURT
Branch 4
Hall of Justice
Zamboanga City

VERIFICATION & CERTIFICATION

WE, Kim Chui, Liza Seguera, Brad Pit, under oath depose and says
that:

1. We are the Defendants in this case;

2. We have personally caused the preparation of the foregoing Joint Answer;
3. We have read and understood all the allegations therein;
4. All the contents thereof are true and correct of our own knowledge and
information;
5. We have not commenced any other action or proceedings involving the
same issues subject of this case in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or
any other tribunals or agency, and, to the best of our knowledge, no such
action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or
any other tribunal or agency; and that if I should hereafter learn that a
similar action or proceedings has been filed with or is pending before the
Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I
undertake to report said fact to this Honorable Court within five (5) days
from knowledge thereof.
Page 4 of 5
 Zamboanga City, Philippines, March 12, 2019.

KIM CHUI LIZA SEGUERA

Defendant Defendant
TIN no.111-777-888 TIN no.111-777-999

BRAD PITT
Defendant
TIN No. 222-999-555

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me as Notary Public, for

and in the City of Zamboanga, Philippines, this 12th day of March, 2019.
Affiants having exhibited to their above-written proof identity.

Doc. No. ____;

Page No. ____;
Book No.____;
Series of 2019.

Page 5 of 5