[go: up one dir, main page]

100% found this document useful (1 vote)
288 views7 pages

Complaint For Ejectment - ILUSTRE

This complaint is filed by Dante and Alicia Erese, representing Ermelinda and Herminio, against Arthur Padillo regarding possession of a 300 square meter property covered by Title T-2809-P(M). The plaintiffs allege that Padillo has been occupying the property by tolerance only for over 30 years but has now constructed structures without authorization. Despite demands, Padillo has refused to vacate. The plaintiffs seek restitution of possession, damages, attorney's fees, and other relief.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
100% found this document useful (1 vote)
288 views7 pages

Complaint For Ejectment - ILUSTRE

This complaint is filed by Dante and Alicia Erese, representing Ermelinda and Herminio, against Arthur Padillo regarding possession of a 300 square meter property covered by Title T-2809-P(M). The plaintiffs allege that Padillo has been occupying the property by tolerance only for over 30 years but has now constructed structures without authorization. Despite demands, Padillo has refused to vacate. The plaintiffs seek restitution of possession, damages, attorney's fees, and other relief.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

Republic of the Philippines

Municipal Trial Court in Cities


City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan
Branch___

ERMELINDA S. ILUSTRE-LICHAUCO
and HERMINIO S. ILUSTRE, repre-
sented by Dante M. Erese and Alicia
Erese,
Plaintiff,

vs. Civil Case No. _______________


For: Recovery of Possession

ARTHUR PADILLO and all other persons


Claiming rights over them,
Defendants.
x------------------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW Plaintiff in the above captioned case, unto this


Honorable Court, most respectfully files this Complaint for Recovery of
Possession of Property and avers THAT:

I.
THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiffs DANTE M. ERESE and ALICIA ERESE are the duly


authorized representatives of ERMELINDA S. ILUSTRE-LICHAUCO
and HERMINIO S. ILUSTRE and have their address at 1339 Craig
St., Sampaloc, Manila. A copy of the Special Power of Attorney
authorizing them to act on behalf of Ermelinda and Herminio is hereto
attached as Annex “A” forming an integral part of this Complaint.

For purposes of this case, Plaintiffs may be served with notices and
other court processes through their counsel Atty. Antonio D. Andres
Jr., at AGA Law Office, San Jose St., Poblacion I, City of San Jose
del Monte Bulacan.

2. Herein Defendant ARTHUR PADILLO, present occupant and


possessor of Block 4 Lot 10 Del Monte Heights Subdivision, Brgy.
Sto. Cristo, City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan, where he may be
served with summons and other court processes.

II.
ALLEGATIONS

1. The Plaintiffs are the lawful owners of subject portion of a parcel of


land which is covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-2809-P
(M) and situated at Block 4 Lot 10 Del Monte Heights Subdivision,
Brgy. Sto. Cristo, City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan with an area of
Three Hundred square meters (300 m 2) and which is being occupied
by the Defendant by virtue of mere tolerance. Copy of said Transfer
Certificate of Title is hereto attached as Annex “B”.

2. The said parcel of land has an assessed value of THIRTY


THOUSAND PESOS (Php30,000.00) and market value of THREE
HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (Php300,000.00) as per Tax
Declaration No. 2011-01-0022-29133 and Property Identification No.
193-01-0022-619-35. Copy of the Tax Declaration is hereto attached
as Annex “C” and made integral part hereof.

3. That on October 1, 2019, Dante Erese paid a visit to the subject


property and was surprised to see that another structure was built by
defendant Arthur Padillo. Said structure was in addition to another
structure built the previous year 2018. This property with a total area
of 300 square meters was surreptitiously occupied by the defendant
in 2018 and initially made a small structure thereat.

4. The property was previously under the care and possession of Mr.
Erese’s wife as well as the title holders. However, the defendant was
allowed to possess the same some more than thirty (30) years ago
when they were allowed possession thru tolerance only.

5. Defendant, who lived nearby was allowed out of compassion with an


undertaking that he will surrender possession as soon as the owners
will need the property and they cannot construct houses therein
which are cemented or concrete.

6. To our shock, surprise and dismay, we discovered unauthorized


persons were residing in said property without our knowledge or
consent. We later learned that they repeatedly constructed cemented
houses therein without prior authorization from us.

7. We then brought the matter to the Barangay. Failing to reach a


peaceful settlement of the matter and to vacate the premises, we
were issued a Certificate to File Action dated June 7, 2019. We then
hired a lawyer to file the instant case. Copies of the Certificate to File
Action dated June 7, 2019 and Barangay Complaint are hereto
attached as Annexes “D” and “D-1” respectively.

8. The Plaintiffs’ counsel sent Defendant a demand to vacate the said


parcel of land but to no avail. Despite said final demand to vacate,
defendant failed and still refused to vacate the subject parcel of land.
Copy of said Demand to Vacate is hereto attached as Annex “E”.
9. As a result of the unlawful and unjustifiable refusal of defendants to
vacate the subject property and the surrender of the peaceful
possession thereof to the plaintiffs, we are claiming and demanding
that plaintiffs be compensated for the use and occupancy of the
premises by the defendants, and a reasonable sum of Php30,000.00
monthly starting from the filing of the instant complaint until they fully
vacate and surrender its peaceful possession to us, the Spouses.
And for them to remit all the rentals from the time that they failed to
remit to us.

10. Defendant, who have been unlawfully possessing and


occupying the subject parcel of land, despite due notice and demand
to vacate the same, unjustifiably failed and refused and continue to
fail and refuse to vacate the said premises. Thus, due to defendant’s
wanton disregard and deliberate violation of the plaintiff’s right to
enjoy the rightful possession of their property, herein plaintiffs has
suffered and continuously suffering sleepless nights, serious anxiety
and other similar sufferings from which entitles him to the recovery of
moral damages in the amount of Php250,000.00. In addition, an
amount of Php120,000.00 as exemplary damages in order to serve
as a deterrence for others not to commit the same mistake, should be
warranted.

11. In a catena of cases, the Supreme Court has consistently held


that “[A] person who occupies the land of another at the latter's
tolerance or permission, without any contract between them, is
necessarily bound by an implied promise that he will vacate upon
demand, failing which, a summary action for ejectment may be filed
against him1”.

10. And under Section 1 of Rule 70 of Rules of Court, Subject to the


provisions of the next succeeding section, a person deprived of the
possession of any land or building by force, intimidation, threat,
strategy, or stealth, or a lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person
against whom the possession of any land or building is unlawfully
withheld after the expiration or termination of the right to hold
possession, by virtue of any contract, express or implied, or the legal
representatives or assigns of any such lessor, vendor, vendee, or
other person, may, at any time within one (1) year after such unlawful
deprivation or withholding of possession, bring an action in the proper
Municipal Trial Court against the person or persons unlawfully
withholding or depriving of possession, or any person or persons
claiming under them, for the restitution of such possession, together
with damages and costs.

1
Rivera v. Rivera, G.R. No. 154203, [July 8, 2003], 453 PHIL 404-413; Catedrilla v. Spouses Lauron, 709 Phil. 335,
349 (2013) as cited in Diaz, Jr. v. Valenciano, Jr., G.R. No. 209376, [December 6, 2017]
11. Due to defendant’s blatant refusal to vacate the premises, plaintiff
was constrained to engage the services of a legal counsel to protect
their rights, interests and incurred attorney’s fees of ONE HUNDRED
THOUSAND PESOS (Php100,000.00) and FIVE THOUSAND
PESOS (Php5,000.00) as appearance fee per hearing and other
litigation expenses.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed


from the Honorable Court to render judgment, ordering the defendants:

1. To vacate the subject premises and to surrender the peaceful


possession to the Plaintiffs;

2. To pay/reimburse to the plaintiffs’ attorney’s fee of Php100,000.00


and appearance fee of Php5,000.00 per hearing and costs of the suit;

3. To pay the Plaintiffs moral damages in the amount of Php250,000.00


and exemplary damages in the amount of Php120,000.00.

4. For such other reliefs and remedies just and equitable under the
forgoing premises.

______________ ___ 2022, City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan.

DANTE ERESE ALICIA ERESE


Petitioner Petitioner

Assisted by:

ADA LAW OFFICE


San Jose St. Brgy. Poblacion 1
City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan
0917-5414344
By:

ANTONIO D. ANDRES JR.


Roll No. 59469
IBP No. 168876; 12/31/2021 FOR 2022
PTR No. 2641057: 01/03/2022
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0027749:4/5/2019
Email:attorneyandres@yahoo.com
Telephone No: 09175414344
COPY FURNISHED:

ARTHUR PADILLO
Block 4 Lot 10
Del Monte Heights Subdivision
Brgy. Sto. Cristo, CSJDM
Bulacan
Republic of the Philippines )
Province of Bulacan )S.S.
City of San Jose del Monte )

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, DANTE M. ERESE, of legal age, Filipino citizen, and a resident of


1339 Craig St., Sampaloc, Manila, after having been duly sworn to in
accordance with Philippine law, do hereby depose and state: THAT—

1. I am the Plaintiff in the above case and as such, I have


caused the preparation and filing of the foregoing Complaint
for Recovery of Possession against Arthur Padillo.

2. I have read the same and declare that the contents


thereof are true and correct of my own knowledge and
based on official and authentic records;

3. This Complaint is filed not to harass, cause


unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase cost of litigation.
Moreover, this Complaint contains factual allegations that
have evidentiary support or will likewise have evidentiary
support after reasonable opportunity for discovery;

4. I further certify that I have 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; to the best of my
knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or different divisions
thereof, any other tribunal or agency; and

5. If I should thereafter learn that the same or similar


action or claim has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or different divisions
thereof, or any other tribunal or agency, I shall report that
fact within five (5) calendar days therefrom to the court
wherein the aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has
been filed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this


___ day of _______, 2022, the City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan.

DANTE M. ERESE
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this ___ day of ______,
2022, in the City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan, affiant exhibiting his ID
No. _____ with his picture and signature appearing therein.

NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No.___
Page No.___
Book no.___
Series of 2022.

You might also like