Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES

Second Judicial Region
Branch ___
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

RHODERICK C. AYUYANG, CIVIL CASE NO. _______

Plaintiff,
- FOR -
- versus -
“RECOVERY OF POSSESSION
___________________________ WITH QUETING OF TITLE”
AND _____________________,
Defendants.
x-------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

PLAINTIFF, through the undersigned counsel, unto this

Honorable Court, most respectfully alleges that:

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff RHODERICK R. AYUYANG is of legal age,

Filipino citizen and a resident of Annafunan East,
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan, where she may be served with
notices, orders, and other judicial processes;

2. Defendants _______________________ are of all legal

ages, Filipino citizens both residents of Annafunan East,
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan, where they may be served
with summons, notices, orders, and other judicial processes;

FACTUAL ANTECEDENT

3. Plaintiff is the registered owner of a parcel of land

covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. ________________
which is more particularly described as follows:

“A parcel of land……..”

Attached hereto is the copy of the Transfer Certificate of

Title No. ____________ marked as ANNEX “A”.

1
 4. And the subject property has an Assessed Value of Six
Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Pesos (P6,840.00). The same
amount falls within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court;

Attached hereto is the Tax Declaration marked as ANNEX

“B”.

5. Sometime in the year 1970’s plaintiff’s brother by the

name of ___________________ surprisingly erected a house
without plaintiff’s permission. Since plaintiff was then
assigned in another municipality as a teacher, she could
not have possibly prevented her brother from commencing
any construction of structures in the said land;

6. When plaintiff confronted her brother, the latter

pleaded that he be allowed to stay in the said land
temporarily, after all, he and his family would then transfer
to Manila. And promised to voluntarily vacate the premises.
True enough, her brother left the premises. But his
deceased son-in-law, ______________, with his two sons,
__________________, who are defendants in this instant
complaint stayed at the same house without authority or
permission from the plaintiff;

7. In fact, the defendants put up their own motorcycle

repair shop in the said premises without the knowledge and
prior consent of the plaintiff;

Attached hereto are the Sketch Plan, Relocation Survey

Report of Engr. ___________________ and Pictures marked as
ANNEX “C”, ANNEX “D” and ANNEX “E” to series ANNEX “E-6”,
respectively.

8. And despite efforts and oral pleas for them to leave

the premises, they would even threaten the plaintiff.
Hence, the plaintiff referred the matter to the Office of the
Barangay Chairman. There has been a personal
confrontation between the parties before the Barangay
Chairman but mediation failed. The Sangguniang
Barangay was constituted but the personal confrontation
before the same likewise did not result into settlement.

Attached hereto is the Certification to File Action marked

as ANNEX “F”.

2
 9. Plaintiff wanted to put up a building at the said
premises where the defendants are staying. However,
despite pleas from the plaintiff, the same fell on deaf ears;

10. And despite the fact that defendants unlawfully

usurped the premises of plaintiff’s property, she
continuously and religiously paid the taxes on the said land;

Attached hereto are the Tax Receipts and Certification of

Tax Clearance marked as ANNEX “G” and ANNEX “H”,
respectively.

CAUSE OF ACTION

11. Plaintiff was deprived of all her rights over her property
not only to possess the same but also the right to enjoy it.
That is not even to mention the unrealized income or fruit
which she may derive from it;

12. Plaintiff is experiencing so much sleepless nights, fears

and anxieties caused by deliberate refusal of the
defendants to leave the premises of the former’s property.
This suffering of the plaintiff has now been aggravated by
being dragged into rigors, expense and shame of public
trial. Thus, defendants deserve to pay Moral damages in
the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00);

13. And as a matter of lesson to the defendants and as a

warning to each and every one, the defendants must pay
the plaintiff an amount of THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS
(P30,000.00) as Exemplary damages;

14. With all the disturbances caused by the defendants,

the plaintiff is constrained to engage the services of a
counsel. Thus, the defendants shall pay an amount of
THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS (P30,000.00) as attorney’s fees
and ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P1,500.00) as
appearance fee per hearing;

15. For the sake of justice, defendants must also pay the
cost of this suit.

PRAYER

3
 WHEREFORE, premises considered, it most respectfully
prayed of this Honorable Court to:

a. GRANT the actual possession of the subject property

in favor of the Plaintiff she being the registered and lawful
owner of the same;

b. ORDER the demolition of the structures put up by the

plaintiff’s brother and subsequently where the defendants
presently resides;

c. ORDER defendants to pay the following, to wit:

c.1. To pay the amount of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS

(P5,000.00) per month as compensation for the
reasonable use of the subject premises until they
finally vacate the said premises;

c.2. Moral damages in the amount of FIFTY

THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00);

c.3. Exemplary damages in the amount of THIRTY

THOUSAND PESOS (P30,000.00);

c.4. Attorney’s fee in the amount of THIRTY

THOUSAND PESOS (P30,000.00); and

c.5. Appearance fee per hearing in the amount of

ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P1,500.00);

d. Other relief, just and equitable, is likewise prayed for.

Tuguegarao City, Cagayan. May 8, 2015.

By: