Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
FE A. JUSTINIANI
CAROLINA J. OCAMPO
EUGENIA L. JUSTINIANI
MAY NADINE J. SALIMBANGON
ROBERT FRANCIS J. ALDEMITA
LUCILLE W. JUSTINIANI
Plaintiff-Co owners,
COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFFS, through counsel and before the Honorable Court, most
respectfully state that:
THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff FE JUSTINIANI is of legal age, single, Filipino and with residence
and postal address at19C Don Pedro Rodriguez St., Capitol Site, Cebu City;
6. Plaintiffs may be served with summons and other court processes at the
address of the undersigned counsel indicated herein;
Page 2 of 13
11. Defendant MARY ANN MALESIDO is of legal age, married, Filipino, with
residence at Barangay Eastern, Hilongos Leyte, where she may be served
with summons and other processes of this Honorable Court.
12. Defendant JOSHUA NIEZ is of legal age, married, Filipino, with residence
at Barangay Eastern, Hilongos Leyte, where he may be served with
summons and other processes of this Honorable Court.
18. Lot No. 1-c-5 was subdivided into four (4) lots, namely:
a. 1-C-5-A
b. 1-C-5-B
c. 1-C-5-C
d. 1-C-5-D
Page 3 of 13
19. Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No: 19342 was cancelled, and in lieu
thereof Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No: T-35003 to cover LOT 1-C-5-
D was issued in the name of all the five heirs as co-owners and recorded on
December 6, 2006 in the Registration Book of the Register of Deeds of the
Province of Leyte;
20. Thru the neat chicanery and handiwork of defendant Sembrano, Lot 1-C-5-
D was subdivided into:
1. Lot 1-C-5-A
2. Lot 1-C-5-B
3. Lot 1-C-5-C
4. Lot 1-C-5-D
21. Lot 1-C-5-D was further subdivided into seven lots, namely:
1. Lot 1-C-5-D-1
2. Lot 1-C-5-D-2
3. Lot 1-C-5-D-3
4. Lot 1-C-5-D-4
5. Lot 1-C-5-D-5
6. Lot 1-C-5-D-6
7. Lot 1-C-5-D-7 (subject matter of this controversy)
Page 4 of 13
26. Given this relationship, let alone the favorable recommendation of the late
Brigida Flanco (Sembrano’s mother in law) in favor of defendant Sembrano
to act as agent for the co-owner-siblings, the latter reposed upon defendant
Sembrano, the highest degree of confidence.
27. On June 29, 2006, Rodolfo A. Justiniani died. He was then succeeded by
plaintiff Eugenia L. Justiniani, his widow and plaintiff May Nadine, his
daughter;
28. A year later or on June 26, 2007, Concepcion J. Aldemita also died. She was
then succeeded by plaintiff Robert Francis J. Aldemita, her adopted son.
29. On September 9,2014, Florentino died while being resident in the California,
USA; He was then succeded by plaintiff, Lucille W. Justiniani, his widow.
30. The subject matter of this controversy is Lot # 1-C-5-D-7, a portion of Lot 1-
C-5-D covered under TCT No. T-36180, particularly described as follows:
32. They then met in one of the Fast Food Restaurants (Jollibee) in Cebu City for
a breakfast meeting. Defendant Sembrano then presented to the two
plaintiffs numerous documents for signing.
33. While reading through the documents, one document caught the attention
of Plaintiff Eugenia. It was entitled “EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT AND
PARTITION AMONG HEIRS WITH ABSOLUTE SALE”. The subject of the
sale was Lot # 1-C-5-D-7 under TCT No. T-36180 containing an area of a
FOURTEEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED TWENTY-SEVEN THOUSAND
(14,927) SQUARE METER with the co-owner siblings as seller and a certain
BENEDIK S. JAYME as buyer.
36. She further surmised that this could not be part of Lot 1-C-5-D-5 as the
latter lot contained only an area of 5,973 square meters.
37. Moreover, she inquired into the personality of the purported buyer,
defendant BENEDIK S. JAYME with whom they were never personally
acquainted prior to the sale. It was found out later that defendant JAYME is
defendant Sembrano’s nephew, a relative to the latter within the third
degree of consanguinity.
38. Plaintiffs Fe and Eugenia refused to affix their signatures in the said two
documents instead the latter took a copy of the said two documents.
Page 6 of 13
39. Sometime on February 2014, feeling aggrieved Plaintiff Eugenia caused the
filing of Estafa thru Falsification of Public Document against defendant
Sembrano before the Provincial Prosecutor’s Office of Leyte;
40. In the year 2017, rumors had it that the subject property was registered in
the name of defendant Benedik Jayme through the fraudulent machination
of defendant Sembrano.
41. Indeed, upon verification with the Office of the Register of Deeds of Leyte,
plaintiffs were astonished to find out that TCT No. T-36180 covering Lot No.
1-C-5-D-7 had been cancelled and in lieu thereof TCT No. 115-2017000642
was issued to defendant Benedik S. Jayme on April 3, 2017. A copy of TCT
No. 115-2017000642 is herein marked as Annex “__”
43. Plaintiffs Eugenia and Fe deny to have signed the document entitled
Extrajudicial Settlement and Partition in 2009. For if such were the case, it
could not have caught plaintiffs by surprise to see the identical Extrajudicial
Settlement for signing in 2013 which led to the filing of an Estafa case in
February 2014.
44. If ever plaintiffs Eugenia and Fe’s signatures appeared in the document
purportedly alienating the property to defendant Jayme, their consent were
obtained through false and fraudulent assurances, misrepresentation, tricks
and deceitful scheme employed by defendant Sembrano taking undue
advantage of the trust and confidence reposed on him which was
committed in this wise:
1. Sometime in 2009, in one of the busy fast food restaurants in Cebu City
where plaintiffs Eugenia and Fe and Defendant Sembrano usually
meet, the latter taking advantage of the trust and confidence repose
upon him by the plaintiffs and with intent to deceive, made
representations to Plaintiffs Eugenia and Fe that the numerous copies
of the Deed of Absolute Sale he brought with him from Hilongos Leyte
for plaintiffs’ signature as vendors, pertains to several subdivided land
of lot 1-5-C-5-D-5 only;
Page 7 of 13
2. The representation in this regard made to plaintiffs were false, and
were known to be false when they were made by defendant Sembrano,
because in truth and in fact, among the several Deeds of Absolute Sale
documents, one of which pertains to a sale of the whole of Lot 1-5-C-5-
D-7 and not only of Lot 1-5-C-5-D-5;
45. It is further interesting to note that Plaintiff May Nadine’s signature in the
Extrajudicial Settlement was a forgery.
46. The due execution and authenticity of the document entitled “SPECIAL
POWER OF ATTORNEY” is likewise denied, as Concepcion Aldemita’s
signature therein was likewise a forgery.
48. Meanwhile, unknown to the plaintiffs and while the title was still in the
name of the co-owner siblings, defendant Sembrano disposed portions of
subject land to the following buyers who without exercising due diligence in
1
Article 1877. An agency couched in general terms comprises only acts of administration, even if
the principal should state that he withholds no power or that the agent may execute such acts as
he may consider appropriate, or even though the agency should authorize a general and unlimited
management.
Page 8 of 13
ascertaining the vendor’s title to the property and his capacity to convey,
bought the same in bad faith, namely:
49. All these acts were upon the fraudulent orchestration and machination of
defendant Renato Sembrano who malevolently, maliciously and illegally
used Benedik S. Jayme as his dummy to the prejudice of the plaintiffs who
are the true owners thereof;
50. On July 6, 2018, plaintiffs filed an Adverse Claim before the Register of
Deeds of the Province of Leyte. Such Adverse Claim is annotated on
Defendant Benedik Jayme’s title, TCT No: 115-2017000642, under Entry No:
2018002485.
51. No conciliation before the Barangay concerned was initiated as the parties
to this case do not belong to the same municipality or city.
52. For the vindication of the rights of plaintiffs over the subject parcel of land,
the latter are entitled to receive from defendants, jointly and severally, as
Page 9 of 13
reasonable compensation, the FAIR MARKET VALUE with corresponding
payment of 24% interest per annum by way of damages;
53. The unlawful and malicious acts committed by defendants had caused
plaintiffs to suffer mental anguish, serious and great anxiety, moral shock
and injury thereby warranting the individual award of moral damages of
Php500,000.00 for each plaintiff, to be charged against all defendants in
solidum;
54. In order to discourage those who are similarly bent from doing such
detestable acts, and in order to set an example for the public good,
defendants should be adjudged, in solidum, to pay to plaintiffs the amount
of Php500,000.00 as exemplary damages.
55. In order to protect their rights and interest over the subject parcel of land,
plaintiffs were compelled to litigate and incur expenses thereby entitling
them to the award of attorney’s fees in its extraordinary concept in the
amount of Php 500,000.00;
56. The defendants shall likewise be charged with the expenses and costs of
litigation to include the reasonable compensation paid to counsel in the
amount of P100,000.00 as acceptance fee, P3,000.00 as appearance fee,
and the docket fee.
THE RELIEFS
Page 10 of 13
4) Ordering Benedik S. Jayme and/or Renato Sembrano to surrender the
Owner’s Duplicate Copy of TCT NO. 115-2017000642;
Plaintiffs pray for such other reliefs and remedies that are just and
equitable under the premises.
3. We have read the allegations herein contained, and that the same are true
and correct of our personal knowledge and based on authentic records;
In witness whereof, I have hereunto signed this Verification and Certification this
_____ day of June 2019, in Hilongos Leyte, Philippines.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a notary public in and for the
Province of Leyte, this ______ day of June, 2019, in Hilongos Leyte. The affiant,
whom I identified through the above stated competent evidence of identity,
personally signed the foregoing instrument before me and avowed under penalty
of law to the whole truth of the contents of said instrument.
Page 13 of 13