Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Eight Judicial Region
1st MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT
Kawayan, Biliran

LUZANTA LOGRO-
VICTORIOSO, CIVIL CASE NO.
Plaintiff, FOR: RECOVERY OF OWNERSHIP
and POSSESION OF REAL PROPERTY
with PRELIMINARY
-versus INJUNCTION

THE SPOUSES ESMERALDO

And JUDITH COLLANTO, and
THE SPOUSES ALLAN and GLORIA
PRUDENCIADO,
Defendants.

x-------------------------------------------/

ANSWER WITH MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendants through undersigned counsel, unto the Honorable court,

specifically allege that:

1. Defendants are all of legal age, widow/married, Filipino citizens and a

resident of Barangay Baganito, Kawayan, Biliran, Philippines, with legal
capacity to sue and to be sued where they may be served with summons and
legal processes.

2. Defendants have no knowledge to form a belief that as to the truth of the

allegation, therefore specifically deny it;

3. Defendants have no knowledge to form a belief that as to the truth of the

allegations of paragraph 2, therefore specifically deny it;

4. Defendants specifically deny the allegations of paragraph 3 for lack of

knowledge or information sufficient to believe the truth hereon, therefore
specifically deny it;
5. Defendants specifically deny the allegations of paragraph 4 for lack of
knowledge or information sufficient to believe the truth hereon, therefore
specifically deny it;

6. Defendants specifically deny the allegations of paragraph 5, paragraph 6,

paragraph 7, paragraph 8, paragraph 9, paragraph 10, paragraph 11,
paragraph 12, paragraph 13, and paragraph 14 for having no knowledge of
information sufficient to believe the truth hereon, therefore specifically deny
it;

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

1. That in 1963 three of the heirs of Roman Onrejas, namely: Margarita, Felipe
and Beatriz executed a deed of absolute sale before Notary Public Victorino
J. Salloman conveying 3/5 of their respective shares of the residential land at
Brgy. Baganito Kawayan, Biliran to Sps. Primo and Natividad Prudenciado
which they inherited from their deceased father Roman Onrejas who died in
1954. A copy of the Deed of Absolute Sale is hereto attached and marked as
(Exhibit A) of this complaint;

2. Immediately after the sale the document was registered by the Sps. Primo
and Natividad Prudenciado at the Office of the Register of Deeds in
Tacloban, Leyte as shown in the face of the document which is marked as
(Exhibit A-1) as an integral part of this document;

3. The 3/5 portions of the land was transferred and declared in the name of
Primo Prudenciado in 1968 under tax declaration No. 3615 cancelling
previous tax declaration No. 1378 in the name of Roman Onrejas. Copies of
the two tax declarations are hereto attached and marked as (Exhibits B and
C) as an integral part of this complaint;

4. Immediately after the sale the vendees Primo and Natividad occupied and
possessed the 3/5 portion of the land which they acquired from Margarita
Onrejas, Felipe Onrejas and Beatriz Onrejas and paid realty taxes thereof to
the Government. When they moved to the opposite lot across the barangay
road they instructed their son Allan and his Wife Gloria and their nephew
and niece Esmeraldo and Judith Collanto to occupy the portions acquired by
them from Margarita, Felipe and Beatriz. As trustees they were allowed to
build their own housed and lived from 1963 to the present or for a period of
48 years.
5. When the defendants heard that a certain Losanta Logro was interested in
buying the share of Beatriz Onrejas sometime in the year 1971 they
immediately notified Losanta Logro not to buy the property because Beatriz
Onrejas had already sold her share to Primo and Natividad Prudenciado,
Allans parents.

6. Despite the warning given to her, Losanta Logro and Beatriz Onrejas
proceeded to the Office of the Municipal Judge of Kawayan, Biliran on June
22, 1971 and executed the document of sale before Notary Public Ex-Officio
Judge Bonifacio V. Curso appearing as Doc. No. 470, Page No. 96, Book
No. III, and Series of 1971. A copy of the Deed of Absolute Sale of a
Residential Land is hereto attached and marked as (Exhibit D) as an
integral part of this complaint.

7. Before the sale to Losanta Logro in 1971 the 3/5 portions which included the
share of Beatriz Onrejas was already transferred to Primo Prudenciado under
tax declaration No. 3615 consisting of .3650 sq. meters cancelling tax
declaration No. 3678 in the name of Ramon Onrejas.

8. As a consequence of the sale and transfer of the share of Beatriz Onrejas to

Primo Prudenciado, the plaintiff Losanta Logro can no longer acquire by
purchase the share of Beatriz Onrejas on June 22, 1971, because under the
law no one can sell what he does not own.

9. The fact, that plaintiff was a buyer in bad faith and her seller Beatriz Onrejas
knew of the first sale and the document she had executed and signed in favor
of Primo Prudenciado was validly executed and registered with the Office of
the Register of Deeds at Tacloban City makes the sale to Losanta Logro
simulated, fictitious and null and void ab initio or non-existence.

10.Losanta Logro was notified by the defendants in 1971 that the inheritance
and share of Beatriz from Roman Onrejas was already sold to his parents
Primo and Natividad Prudenciado in 1963; nevertheless she failed to
exercise the ordinary care and vigilance expected of a buyer of real estate by
investigating the nature of possession of the first buyer. She must therefore
suffer the consequences of her own act. (Caran Jr., vs. V. Laurita, 103 SCRA
7).

11.Under the circumstances, defendants and her predecessors and the

defendants as successors has a better right over plaintiff Losanta Logro,
because defendants predecessors acquired the land in 1963 while the
 plaintiff acquired the same land in 1971 only, or a period of eight (8) years
back;

12.The document of sale in 1971 in favor of Losanta Logro is at least null and
void for being a simulated and fictitious document because at the time of the
sale of Beatriz Honrejas she was no longer the owner of the property in
questioned;

13.Under Art. 1410 of the Civil Code of the Philippines the action or defense
for the declaration of the inexistence of a contract does not prescribed. It is
imprescriptible. (Fornilda vs. Branch 164 Regional Trial Court IVth
Judicial Region, Pasig City. 166 SCRA 281).

FACTS OF THE CASE

1. That in 1963 three of the heirs of Roman Onrejas, namely: Margarita, Felipe
and Beatriz executed a deed of absolute sale before Notary Public Victorino
J. Salloman conveying 3/5 of their respective shares of the residential land at
Brgy. Baganito Kawayan, Biliran to Sps. Primo and Natividad Prudenciado
which they inherited from their deceased father Roman Onrejas who died in
1954. A copy of the Deed of Absolute Sale is hereto attached and marked as
(ExhibitA) of this complaint;

2. Immediately after the sale the document was registered by the Sps. Primo
and Natividad Prudenciado at the Office of the Register of Deeds in
Tacloban, Leyte as shown in the face of the document which is marked as
(Exhibit A-1) as an integral part of this document;

3. The 3/5 portions of the land was transferred and declared in the name of
Primo Prudenciado in 1968 under tax declaration No. 3615 cancelling
previous tax declaration No. 1378 in the name of Roman Onrejas. Copies of
the two tax declarations are hereto attached and marked as (Exhibits B and
C) as an integral part of this complaint;

4. Immediately after the sale the vendees Primo and Natividad occupied and
possessed the 3/5 portion of the land which they acquired from Margarita
Onrejas, Felipe Onrejas and Beatriz Onrejas and paid realty taxes thereof to
the Government. When they moved to the opposite lot across the barangay
road they instructed their son Allan and his Wife Gloria and their nephew
and niece Esmeraldo and Judith Collanto to occupy the portions acquired by
 them from Margarita, Felipe and Beatriz. As trustees they were allowed to
build their own housed and lived from 1963 to the present or for a period of
48 years.

5. When the defendants heard that a certain Losanta Logro was interested in
buying the share of Beatriz Onrejas sometime in the year 1971 they
immediately notified Losanta Logro not to buy the property because Beatriz
Onrejas had already sold her share to Primo and Natividad Prudenciado,
Allans parents.

6. Despite the warning given to her, Losanta Logro and Beatriz Onrejas
proceeded to the Office of the Municipal Judge of Kawayan, Biliran on June
22, 1971 and executed the document of sale before Notary Public Ex-Officio
Judge Bonifacio V. Curso appearing as Doc. No. 470, Page No. 96, Book
No. III, and Series of 1971. A copy of the Deed of Absolute Sale of a
Residential Land is hereto attached and marked as (Exhibit D) as an
integral part of this complaint.

7. Before the sale to Losanta Logro in 1971 the 3/5 portions which included the
share of Beatriz Onrejas was already transferred to Primo Prudenciado under
tax declaration No. 3615 consisting of .3650 sq. meters cancelling tax
declaration No. 3678 in the name of Ramon Onrejas.

8. As a consequence of the sale and transfer of the share of Beatriz Onrejas to

Primo Prudenciado, the plaintiff Losanta Logro can no longer acquire by
purchase the share of Beatriz Onrejas on June 22, 1971, because under the
law no one can sell what he does not own.

9. The fact, that plaintiff was a buyer in bad faith and her seller Beatriz Onrejas
knew of the first sale and the document she had executed and signed in favor
of Primo Prudenciado was validly executed and registered with the Office of
the Register of Deeds at Tacloban City makes the sale to Losanta Logro
simulated, fictitious and null and void ab initio or non-existence.

10.Losanta Logro was notified by the defendants in 1971 that the inheritance
and share of Beatriz from Roman Onrejas was already sold to his parents
Primo and Natividad Prudenciado in 1963; nevertheless she failed to
exercise the ordinary care and vigilance expected of a buyer of real estate by
investigating the nature of possession of the first buyer. She must therefore
suffer the consequences of her own act. (Caran Jr., vs. V. Laurita, 103 SCRA
7).
11.Under the circumstances, defendants and her predecessors and the
defendants as successors has a better right over plaintiff Losanta Logro,
because defendants predecessors acquired the land in 1963 while the
plaintiff acquired the same land in 1971 only, or a period of eight (8) years
back;

12.The document of sale in 1971 in favor of Losanta Logro is at least null and
void for being a simulated and fictitious document because at the time of the
sale of Beatriz Honrejas she was no longer the owner of the property in
questioned;

MOTION TO DISMISS WITH COUNTERCLAIM

Defendants use as reference the allegations of the preceding

paragraphs as basis or proofs:

1. That the former case and the second case are the same cases for recovery of
ownership and possession and state the same facts. That the case filed by the
plaintiffs against the defendants was dismissed by the Municipal Court of
Kawayan and the motion filed for reconsideration was denied by the Court
against the plaintiffs in favor of the defendants and the decision has become
final and executory. The court issued an order of execution making the order
and decision final and executive;

2. In this case that there is res judicata after the case has become final under the
following requirements:

a. There is a former order or judgement that is final and

executory;
b. The order or judgement was rendered by a court of
competent jurisdiction;
c. The judgment or order is on the merits;
d. There is identity of parties, subject matter and cause of
action.

AS A COUNTERCLAIM
 Defendants reproduce the allegations in the preceding paragraph as
part of the causes of action, and states, that:

2.1. In spite efforts to stop the plaintiff from disturbing their

possession of the property in questioned they kept on filing cases in court to
remove them from the land in question forcing them to hire the services of
an attorney to protect their rights and interests and as consequence they
suffered mental anguished, sleepless nights, mental anxiety and social
humiliation causing them to suffer moral damages in the sum of Php.
50,000.00;

2.2. To protect their rights and interest they were compelled to hire a
lawyer with an acceptance fee of Php. 30,000.00 plus 1,500 per court
appearance.

2.3. Expecting a long and tedious litigation they are bound to spend
Php. 20,000.00; and courts fees in the sum of Php. 6,000.00;

2.4. Defendants referred the matter for mediation before the Lupon
ng Tagapamayapa but, the plaintiff refused to make an amicable settlement
forcing them to file this action in court evidence by a certificate of
endorsement issued by the Lupon Chairman hereto attached and marked as
(Exhibit E) as an integral part of this complaint.
 PRAYER FOR RELIEFS

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that

after due notice and hearing judgment be rendered in favor of the defendants
and against the plaintiff ordering the plaintiff, to wit:

1. To declare the deed of absolute sale between Losanta Logro and Beatriz
Honrejas executed before Judge Bonifactio V. Curso in 1971 null and void.

2. Ordering the plaintiff to vacate the portion occupied by them in the lot in
question and to surrender possession and ownership of the property to the
defendants Sps. Esmeraldo and Judith Collanto, and Sps. Allan and Gloria
Prudenciado;

3. Ordering the plaintiff to pay the following:

a. Attorneys fee in the sum of Php. 50,000.00 plus Php. 1,500

per court attendance.

b. Moral damages in the total sum of Php. 50,000.00

c. Litigation expense in the sum of Php. 20,000.00 plus Php.

6,000.00 for filing fee.

Other reliefs which are just and equitable in the premises are likewise
prayed for.

Kawayan, Biliran, February 27, 2017

Esmeraldo Collanto Judith Collanto

Defendant Defendant

Allan Prudenciado Gloria Prudenciado

Defendant Defendant

Mario Lydino Opea

Legal Counsel
 VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

We, SPS. ESMERALDO AND JUDITH COLLANTO, SPS. ALLAN

AND GLORIA PRUDENCIADO, all of legal age, widow/married, Filipino
citizens and a resident of Barangay Baganito, Kawayan, Biliran, Philippines,
after being duly sworn according to law, hereby depose and say:
1. That we are the defendants in the above entitled case and we caused the
preparation of this complaint by our lawyer;
2. That we have read and understood the allegations thereof and the same are
true and correct to the best of our personal knowledge per document n my
possession;
3. That we have not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the
same issues in any Court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency;
4. If there is such other pending action or claim we undertake to make a report
of the status of such case, an
5. If we should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has
been filed or pending, we shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom
to the court where the aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been
filed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We have hereunto affixed our hands and
signatures this ____ day of __________ 2017 at Naval, Biliran, Philippines.

ESMERALDO COLLANTO JUDITH COLLANTO

Affiant Affiant
______________________ ______________________
Issued on. ___________ Issued on. ___________
Issued at. ____________ Issued at. ____________

ALLAN PRUDENCIADO GLORIA PRUDENCIADO

Affiant Affiant
______________________ ______________________
Issued on. ___________ Issued on. ___________
Issued at. ____________ Issued at. ____________

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ____ day of

__________ 2017 at Naval, Biliran, Philippines.

MARIO LYDINO OPEA

Legal Counsel