You are on page 1of 3

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region


Regional Trial Court
Branch 69, Quezon City, Philippines

Tony Monterde,
Plaintiff

-versus- Civil Case No.: 001


For: Damages with Attorney’s
Fees
PREMIUM BANKS INC,
Defendant
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

ANSWER WITH COUNTER-CLAIM


COMES NOW, the defendant, through the undersigned counsel and unto
this Honorable Court, most respectfully alleges:
1. That defendant admits paragraphs 2 and 5 of the complaint;
2. That defendant is without knowledge or information to form a belief as to
the truth of the averments made in paragraph 3, most particularly in the last
statement, 6 and 7 thereof;
3. The defendant denies specifically each and every material allegations
made in paragraph 4 of the complaint, alleges that certain person being alleged to
the defendant’s employee who misplaced the ledger, is not and never been
employed in Premium Bank INC;
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
4. And as affirmative defences, the defendant alleges:
A. Premium Bank Inc commitment is to provide efficient and accurate
service, at the same time, to help promote preserve the trees, Defendant has
upgraded its banking system. Defendant has been using Computerized and
Paperless Operation System (CPOS) which is centralized to our entire branch
rational wide for the past 10 years. So there is no basis of the complaint stated in
paragraph 4 that defendant utilized ledger encoding complainant’s records. The
complaint is fictitious.
B. The plaintiff’s complaint was not supported with evidences for
their allegations to the defendant.
C. The plaintiff can’t pin-point a specific person to whom they
referred to as defendant’s employee. This is another proof that this complaint is
fictitious.
D. And lastly, humiliation and embarrassment are grounds for
recovery of moral damages. However, action for moral damages is ancillary action
which needs principal action.

In view of such, the complaint has no cause of action. The complaint failed
to prove any violations of right, if there is any.

COUNTER-CLAIM
5. As counterclaim against the plaintiff, the defendant alleges:
A. That defendant reproduces paragraph 7 and 8 of the complaint;
B. That plaintiff’s complaint is unfounded and malicious which
caused bad publicity to the point clients of the defendant withdrawn their
respective deposits. This diminished defendant profit as much as P30 Billion.
Defendant asking for the recovery of such amount in the expense by the plaintiff
and for moral damages.
PRAYER
Wherefore, it is respectfully prayed that:
a. Prayer for judgement in with respect of plaintiff’s complaint:
b. Prayer for judgement in favor of defendant counterclaim; and
c. For such other relief consistent with the law and equity and costs.

Quezon City, Philippines, January 17, 2014

Atty. Cristobal Rimando


Counsel for the defendant
Roll No. 090933
IBP No. 12345/1-3-12/ Manila
PTR No. 87654/1-3-12/ Manila

Copy furnished:
Regional Trial Court
Branch 69, Quezon City
Tony Monterde