Republic of the Philippines

Supreme Court
Third Judicial Region
Regional Trial Court in Cities
Branch 1
Cabanatuan City
-o0o-

PETER SICAT,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. _____
-versus-
For: Collection of Sum of Money
ARNEL ROMERO,
Defendant.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW the plaintiff, through the undersigned counsel, and to

this Honorable Court, respectfully alleges:

1. That the plaintiff is of legal age, Filipino citizen and a resident of

Valdefuente, Cabanatuan City. Likewise the defendant is also of legal age,
Filipino citizen and a resident Camia St., Mayapyap Norte, Cabanatuan City
where he may be served with summons;

2. That on or about 06 October 2016, defendant drew a piece of paper

which is a donation of a check in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of One
Hundred Thousand One Pesos (Php 200,001.00) as payment for their R and
R, representing the VIP charges, ladies drinks and the professional fee of
Lady Arwina, in a local bar, Klasmeyt Entertainment, in Daang Sarile,
Cabanatuan City;

3. That by virtue of the issuance of that Deed of Donation of the

postdated check, plaintiff agreed to pay, in the defendant’s behalf and
through the former’s credit card, the due bill afore-quoted, the photocopy of
the machine generated proof of billing of the credit card and the billing
statement containing said charge are hereto attached as Annex “A” and
Annex “A-1”, respectively;

4. That said postdated check when drawn by defendant was evidenced

with a Deed of Donation whom he gave to the plaintiff and the latter signed
as acceptance thereof, the original is hereto attached as Annex “B” and
Annex “C” and made part of this complaint;
5. That when the check fell due on 13 October 2016, plaintiff presented
the check for payment but the same was dishonored by the bank for being
drawn against a CLOSED ACCOUNT, the photocopy of the check stamped
with closed account as Annex “D” as well as the original Bank Certification
dated 13 October 2016 as Annex “E”;

6. That plaintiff after being defaulted by the defendant, called the latter’s
attention through verbal communication, but to no avail;

7. That because of the defendant’s continued disregard, plaintiff sought

the help of the undersigned to which written demand were sent dated 08
November 2016 (Annex “F”), but still, he did not adhere to the payment of
the obligation nor communicated whatsoever with the plaintiff;

8. That despite repeated demands, both written and oral, defendant has
failed and refused to pay the plaintiff of his obligation; and

9. That due to the unjust and unlawful act of the defendant to comply
with the said demands, the plaintiff was compelled to institute this action
engaging in the process the services of counsel in the amount of P20,000.00.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that judgment be rendered

against the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of One Hundred Thousand
and One Pesos (Php 200,001.00) plus interest of 10% from the date of the
instrument until full amount is paid and attorney’s fees in the amount of P20,
000.00 and costs of the suit.

Other equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

19 December 2016.

Cabanatuan City.

EPIFANIA P. BINUYA
Counsel for the Plaintiff

PTR No. ABC-07121974/ January 07, 2016

Issued at Cabanatuan City
IBP No. 097652/January 09, 2016
Nueva Ecija Chapter
Roll No. 95450
MCLE Compliance No. IV-0022012
July 12, 2015
Cabanatuan City Nueva Ecija
 VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM
SHOPPING

PETER SICAT, subscribing under oath, hereby deposes and states

that: He is the plaintiff in this case. He has read the foregoing petition, and
the allegations contained therein are true and correct of his own knowledge
and/or based on authentic records. He attests to the authenticity of the
annexes thereof.

Plaintiff has not commenced any other action or proceeding involving

the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different
Divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency; No such action or
proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or
different Divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency; If petitioner
should learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending
before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different Divisions
thereof, or any other tribunal or agency, he hereby undertakes to notify this
Honorable Court within 5 days therefrom.

PETER SICAT
Plaintiff

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 19th day of

November 2016 in the City of Cabanatuan, affiant exhibiting to me his
Passport No. FB1890456 issued on September 12, 2015 in the City of
Manila.

EPIFANIA P. BINUYA
Counsel for the Plaintiff

PTR No. ABC-07121974/ January 07, 2016

Issued at Cabanatuan City
IBP No. 097652/January 09, 2016
Nueva Ecija Chapter
Roll No. 95450
MCLE Compliance No. IV-0022012
July 12, 2015
Cabanatuan City Nueva Ecija

Doc. No. 888

Page No. 88
Book No. VIII
Series of 2016.
 Republic of the Philippines
Supreme Court of the Philippines
Third Judicial Region
Regional Trial Court in Cities
Branch 1
Cabanatuan City
-o0o-

PETER SICAT,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 5050
-versus-
For: Collection of Sum of Money
ARNEL ROMERO,
Defendant.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

ANSWER
with SPECIAL and AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
and COUNTERCLAIM

NOW COMES the defendant in the above-entitled case and to this

Honorable Court most respectfully alleges:

1. Defendant admits the averment in paragraph 1of the complaint;

2. Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 2;

3. Defendant partially denies the allegation in paragraph 3 of the

complaint, the truth being that plaintiff really intended to pay the One
Hundred One Thousand Pesos (Php 200,001.00) and not otherwise alleged
by the plaintiff;

4. Defendant specifically denies paragraph 4 of the complaint

because the defendant never issued a check in favor of the plaintiff on 06
October 2016; and

5. Defendant has no knowledge or information to form a belief as

to the truth of the averment in paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the complaint.

By way of special and affirmative defenses, defendant avers:

 1. That there was no existing obligation because it was really the
plaintiff who invited the defendant to go to the bar and the latter cordially
agreed to the same on the assumption that the former shall shoulder the
expenses;

2. That the bill in the bar that night of 06 October 2016 was
already paid by the plaintiff through his credit card voluntarily and not only
for and in behalf of the defendant;

3. That the defendant do not remember issuing a check in favor of

the plaintiff, but remembered drawing a check in his office at Talavera,
Nueva Ecija in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand and One Pesos
(Php200,001.00), said check which he gave to the plaintiff for him to
keepsake when they were in the bar for the former is afraid he might lost it
therein.

4. That the defendant cannot recall making any transaction in the

nature of a donation as alleged by the plaintiff. And even assuming arguendo
the check, subject of the donation, was not properly negotiated. As enshrined
under Section 30, Act No. 2031,

“Sec. 30. What constitutes negotiation. –An instrument

is negotiated when it is transferred from one person to another
in such a manner as to constitute the transferee the holder
thereof. If payable to bearer, it is negotiated by delivery. x x x”
(emphasis supplied)

Indeed, the check is payable to bearer, and for the same to be

negotiated it must be delivered; however, the instrument was improperly
delivered. Stressed in Section 16, of the same Act,

“Sec. 16. Delivery; when effectual; when presumed – x

x x, the delivery in order to be effectual, must be made either
by or under the authority of the party making, drawing,
accepting, or indorsing, as the case may be; and, in such case,
the delivery may be shown to have been condition”

The defendant denies delivering the check to the plaintiff. He

just gave the check clearly for safekeeping and without any intention of
transferring title thereof. More so, the deed of donation cannot partake of the
nature of indorsement so as to negotiate in plaintiff’s favor the check. Time-
honored is that a bearer instrument is always a bearer instrument. The
irregularities present in the allegations are so vital as to cast doubt to its
truthfulness.

From the foregoing, it can be said that the check was neither
duly delivered nor negotiated to the plaintiff. The check is owned by the
defendant. Thence, it is improper on the part of the plaintiff to deposit the
same to the drawee bank because it was only given by the defendant to
plaintiff for safekeeping.

By way of counterclaim, defendant alleges:

That by virtue of this unwarranted and malicious act initiated by the

plaintiff, defendant was forced to engage counsel in the sum of P20,000.00

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the complaint be

dismissed and defendant be awarded the amount of P20,000.00.

Other equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

17 December 2015.

Cabanatuan City.

EPIFANIA P. BINUYA
Counsel for the Defendant
Cabanatuan City

Roll No. 74523

IBP No. 864521/1-5-16
PTR No. 123456/1-5-16
MCLE Compliance No. 0009137

Copy furnished
By registered mail
With return card

Counsel for Plaintiffs

Dampulan, Jaen, Nueva Ecija

EXPLANATION

Pursuant to Sec. 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure,

undersigned counsel informs the Honorable Court that personal service of
the instant pleading to the court and adverse party cannot be done personally
due to distance of places and lack of messengerial personnel.

MARIA SALMIYAH C. CRUZ

 VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION

I, ARNEL ROMERO, of legal age, married, Filipino and a resident

of 554Lot 89 Kampupot Street Kapitan Pepe Subdivision, Cabanatuan City,
after having duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and state:

1. That I am the defendant in the above-entitled case;

2. That I caused my lawyer to prepare and file the foregoing Answer;

3. That I have read all the allegations contained herein and the same is
all true and correct of my own personal knowledge base on my
authentic records;
4. That I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving
the same issues in te Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, and other
court, tribunal or agency;
5. To the best of my knowledge, no such action or proceedinf is pending
in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any other court,
tribunal or agency;
6. If there is any such action or proceeding which is either pending or
may have been terminated, I shall state the status thereof;
7. If I should learn later that a similar action or proceeding have been
filed or pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or
any other court, tribunal or agency, I undertake to report that within
five days therefrom.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature

this 17th day of October 2015 at Cabanatuan City.

ARNEL ROMERO
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 17th day of October

2015 at Cabanatuan City.

MARIA SALMIYAH C. CRUZ

Notary Public
My commission exp. on December 31, 2015
Cabanatuan City
Roll No. 50184
IBP No. 742741/1-5-14
PTR No. 4625196/1-5-14
Doc. No. 809
Page No. 26
Book No. XII
Series of 2015.