Anda di halaman 1dari 11

REPUBLIC

OF THE

PHILIPPINES

Municipal Trial Court


BRANCH 6, CEBU CITY
7TH JUDICIAL REGION

PRIMARY STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTION


CORPORATION,
Plaintif,

-versusARTURO CHOI,

CIVIL CASE NO.


______________________
FOR: UNLAWFUL DETAINER
WITH PRAYER FOR PRELIMINARY
MANDATORY INJUNCTION AND
DAMAGES

and all persons claiming rights under him,


Defendants.
x--------------------------------------------------------x

VERIFIED COMPLAINT
PRIMARY
STRUCTURES
CONSTRUCTION
CORPORATION, by counsel, and unto this Honorable Court,
most respectfully alleges that:
1. Plaintiffs, represented by Ms. Rose Tan-Ong, Filipinos, of legal
age, and residents of #65 R. Landon St., Cebu City,
Philippines. For purposes of this action, Plaintiff may be
served with copies of notices, orders, and other processes of
this Honorable Court at the office address of the undersigned
counsel indicated below;
2. Defendant, ARTURO CHOI is also all of legal age, Filipino,
and for purposes of this action, he may be served with
summons and other processes of this Honorable Court at his
residence and post-office address at Blk. 288, Lot 6,
Somerset Tower BII, Osmena Blvd, Cebu City, Philippines;
3. Plaintiff is the true and registered owner of a certain
condominium unit of land situated in Somerset Towers,
Page 1 of 11

Osmena Blvd, Cebu City, Philippines, consisting of


approximately Ninety-Seven (97) square meters, and
identified as Lot 6, Blk. 288 and covered by Transfer
Certificate of Title No. 2272541 of the Registry of Deeds of
the City of Cebu;
4. The Plaintiffs desiring of establishing their own family, and
building a home close to their place of work, bought the lot
subject matter of the instant complaint from Mr. Clarito Lim
(Mr. Lim), as evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale 2 dated
________________.
5. Prior to the sale, and sometime in the 2010, Defendant,
Arturo Choi and his family began to be in possession of the
said property, by virtue of the generosity and charity of Mr.
Arturo Choi, as he had no immediate need of the said
property at that time;
6. That on 16 April 20103, Mr. Lim notified the Defendants of his
intention to sell the said property, wherein he offered the
same to the Defendants should they be interested to buy the
same and conversely to vacate the same should they not be
interested.
7. The Defendants did not respond to Mr. Lims Notice. As such,
the land subject matter of the instant complaint was sold to
the Plaintiffs.
8. On 28 July 2012, The Defendants through Mr. Arturo Choi
entered into a Kasunduan with the Plaintiffs, as the new
owners of the land, wherein they agreed to vacate the land
on 24 November 2012.
9. Thereafter, the Defendants approached the Plaintiffs and
asked for another grace period within which to vacate the
said lot. The Plaintiffs, as an act of mercy and goodwill,
acceded to the request and agreed to move the previous
deadline to 15 February 2013, as embodied in the
Kasunduan dated 10 November 2012.
1
2
3
Page 2 of 11

10.
The Defendants, however, failed to vacate the lot on
the above-stated date, and again begged the Plaintiffs for
another extension of time to vacate. Plaintiffs again granted
the request and moved the deadline to the 31 March 2013.
11.
In order to protect their interest, the Plaintiffs asked the
Defendants to sign a new Kasunduan embodying the new
deadline. However, for reasons unknown to the Plaintiffs,
Defendants unjustly refused to sign and enter into a new
Kasunduan.
12.
As a consequence, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against
the Defendants before the Office of the Barangay Chairman
of Brgy. Pabo Real. As a result, the Barangay summoned the
Defendants to appear before the Lupon Tagapamayapa.
13.
The Defendants, during the mediation proceedings
before the Lupon Tagapamayapa, entered into another
Kasunduan4, embodying the new deadline requested by
the Defendants, i.e. 31 March 2013.
14.
In addition, as part of the above-stated settlement, the
Plaintiffs agreed to give the Defendants twenty thousand
pesos (P20,000.00). As agreed upon, the amount was
deposited with the Barangay for safekeeping, to be given to
the Defendants when they will vacate the lot on 31 March
2013.
15.
Unfortunately, the Defendants again refused to vacate
the premises on the date agreed upon in the settlement.
They again asked for another extension, i.e. after the May
2013 Elections.
16.
In addition, the Defendants demanded that the amount
of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) instead of the original
amount of twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) agreed upon
in the settlement. They reasoned that the original amount
was too small and not enough for their family.
17.
The Plaintiffs, tired of the repeated breaches of the
Defendants, asked the Barangay for assistance. The
Barangay, again initiated and conducted another series
mediation proceeding before the Lupon Tagapamayapa.
4
Page 3 of 11

18.
Unlike the previous mediation proceedings, it did not
yield any positive result, as the parties failed to reach a
reasonable and amicable settlement of the dispute. Hence,
the Lupon Tagapamayapa issued in favor of the Plaintiffs, a
Certificate to File Action5.
19.
The Plaintiffs then engaged the services of the
undersigned counsel. Still desirous to settle the case out of
court, Plaintiffs through counsels liaison officer, Mr. Paul
Villanueva, personally served a Demand/Notice to Vacate 6 to
the Defendants on 26 December 2013.
20.
Defendants, however, ignored the above-described
Demand/Notice to Vacate.
As a result,
a Final
7
Demand/Notice to Vacate was personally served to the
Defendants on 07 January 2014 by the Counsels liaison
officer8. Similarly, the said letter was ignored by the
Defendants.
21.
While possession by tolerance is lawful, such
possession becomes illegal upon demand to vacate is made
by the owner and the possessor by tolerance refuses to
comply with such demand (Prieto vs. Reyes, 14 SCRA 432; Yu
vs. De Lara, 6 SCRA 786, 788; Isidro vs. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 105586, December 15, 1993);
22.
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 (Yu vs. De Lara, supra,
cited in Sumulong vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108817,
May 10, 1994);
23.
That the reasonable rental value of the said land is ten
thousand pesos (PhP 10,000.00) per month;

5
6
7
8
Page 4 of 11

24.
That due to the unjust refusal of the Defendant to
vacate and to return the said land to the Plaintiff, the latter
was constrained to endorse the said matter to its legal
counsel for the filing of an appropriate action in court for a
fee of fifty thousand pesos (PhP 50,000.00).
25.
That this action is being filed within a period of one (1)
year from the demand on Defendant to vacate the said
property.

ALLEGATIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE PRAYER FOR


ISSUANCEOF A WRIT OF PRELIMINARY MANDATORY
INJUNCTION
1. Plaintiffs re-plead by reference all of the foregoing
allegations as may be material and relevant under this
heading;
2. Defendant's continued illegal occupation of the said parcel of
land and refusal to vacate the same and to peacefully
surrender possession thereof to herein Plaintiff is working
grave injustice and causing damage to the latter;
3. The Plaintiffs, due to the unwarranted and unjust refusal of
the Defendants to vacate the premises, is unable to utilize
the said lot and build a home, where they intend to establish
and build a family of their own.
4. Plaintiffs are entitled to the reliefs demanded, and the whole
or part of such relief consists in the immediate delivery and
surrender by the defendants of possession of the land to the
Plaintiff, to build thereon a house they can call their home;
5. In the event that a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction
is granted to Plaintiff, she is ready, willing and able to post a
bond to answer for all damages Defendant may sustain by
reason of said injunction if the court should finally decide
that Plaintiff is not entitled thereto.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that, after
due hearing, judgment be rendered in favor of the plaintiffs:
Page 5 of 11

a) Ordering the Defendant, his family, successors, assigns and


all persons acting under him, to vacate Blk. 288, Lot 6, Brgy.
Pabo Real, Cebu City, that is covered by Transfer Certificate
of Title No. 227254 of the Registry of Deeds of the City of
Cebu and to peacefully turn over the possession thereof to
the Plaintiff;
b) Ordering Defendant to pay Plaintiff monthly rental at the rate
of P10,000.00 per month from the time of the filing of this
action to the time possession is returned to the Plaintiff;
c) Ordering Defendant to pay Attorney's Fees in the amount of
P60,000.00, and to pay cost of suit;
d) That pending the outcome of the instant case, a writ of
preliminary mandatory injunction be immediately issued
ordering the Defendant, his family, successors, assigns and
all persons acting under him, to immediately vacate the said
parcel of land and return possession of the same to the
Plaintiff.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are
likewise prayed for.
Cebu for Cebu City, 27 January 2014.

ATTY. WELLA JANE ATA

Counsel for Petitioner


Address: #12 Dr. Su Drive, Nasipit, Talamban, Cebu City
Contact Nos.: 0917-449-3285
Roll No. 97871
PTR No. 024542; 1/10/09; Cebu City
IBP No. 007308; 12/20/09; Cebu Chapter

Page 6 of 11

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST NONFORUM SHOPPING

I, Ms. ROSE TAN-ONG, representing PRIMARY


STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, of legal
age, Filipino, and residents of #65 R. Landon St., Cebu City,
after being sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and
say that:
1. We are the Plaintiffs in the above-entitled case;
2. We have caused the preparation of the above Complaint,
and have read the same and know the contents thereof;
3. The allegations contained therein are true and correct of our
own personal knowledge, and based on authentic records.
4. We have not theretofore commenced any other action or
proceeding or filed any claim involving the same issues or
matter in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency and, to
the best of our knowledge, no such action or proceeding is
pending therein;
5. If we should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or
proceeding has been filed or is pending before the Supreme
Page 7 of 11

Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or quasijudicial agency, I undertake to report such fact within five (5)
days therefrom to the court or agency wherein the original
pleading and sworn certification contemplated herein have
been filed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We have hereunto set our
hands this 27th of January 2014 at the City of Cebu,
Philippines.

AMANDA ROSE TAN-ONG


Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this 27th of


January 2014 in the City of Cebu, by:
Name
AMANDA
ONG

Identification No.

Valid Until

ROSE TAN- Drivers


License
No. ____________

CLARITO C. LIM

Drivers
License
No. ____________

Both of whom I have identified through competent evidence


of identity.

ATTY. ALEJANDRA BALBUENA

NOTARY PUBLIC
UNTIL SEP. 13, 2016
ATTYS ROLL NO 87980
IBP NO. 345654 JANUARY 2013
ISSUED AT CEBU CITY
Page 8 of 11

Doc. No. ______;


Page No. ______;
Book No. ______;
Series of ______;

Page 9 of 11

AFFIDAVIT OF MERIT
I,
AMANDA ROSE TAN-ONG, representing PRIMARY
STRUCTURES CORPORATION, of legal age, Filipino, and
residents of #65 R. Landon St., Cebu City, after being sworn
in accordance with law, hereby depose and say that:
1.
That we are the plaintiffs in the above-captioned
case filed against Arturo Choi, before the Municipal Trial
Court of Cebu City, Philippines;
2.
That we are the true and registered owners of a
certain parcel of land situated in Blk. 288, Lot 6, Brgy. Pabo
Real, Cebu City and covered by Transfer Certificate of Title
No. 227254 of the Registry of Deeds for the City of Cebu;
3.
That since the 1990s, Defendants and their family
began to be in possession of the said property upon the
mere tolerance of the previous owner thereof, as he had no
immediate need of the said property at that time;
4.
That on 26 December 2013, and 07 January 2014,
We demanded from the Defendants that they and their
family vacate and return the possession of the said property,
but despite numerous demands for them to vacate, the
Defendants have remained in illegal possession of the said
land and, up to the present, still retain such possession;
5.
That the reasonable rental value of the said land is
Twenty Thousand Pesos (P 20,000.00) per month;
6.
That Defendants continued illegal occupation of
the property and refusal to vacate the same and to
peacefully surrender possession thereof is working grave
injustice and causing damage to the undersigned;
7.
That we are entitled to the reliefs demanded in my
complaint, and the whole or part of such relief consists in the
immediate delivery and surrender by the Defendant of
possession of the land to the undersigned;
8.
That in the event that we are granted a writ of
preliminary mandatory injunction, we are ready, willing and
able to post a bond to answer for all damages that the
Defendant may sustain by reason of said injunction if the
court should finally decide that we are not entitled thereto.
Page 10 of 11

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We have hereunto set our


hands this 27th of January 2014 at the City of Cebu,
Philippines.

AMANDA ROSE TAN-ONG


Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this 27th of


January 2014 in the City of Cebu, by:
Name
Amanda
Ong

Rose

Identification No.

Valid Until

Tan- Drivers License No.


____________________

both of whom I have identified through competent evidence of


identity.

ATTY. ALEJANDRA BALBUENA


NOTARY PUBLIC
UNTIL SEP. 13, 2016
ATTYS ROLL NO 87980
IBP NO. 345654 JANUARY 2013
ISSUED AT CEBU CITY
Doc. No. ______;
Page No. ______;
Book No. ______;
Series of ______;

Page 11 of 11