Republic of the Philippines

Regional Trial Court

7th Judicial Region
Branch 24
Cebu City

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,

represented by Department of
Public Works & Highways (DPWH),
Plaintiff,

-versus- Civil Case No. 1008

For: Expropriation
(Ban-Tal Corridor
Project)

MARIA JOSEFINA G. TATAD,

Defendant,
x------------------x

ANSWER

Defendant, MARIA JOSEFINA G. TATAD, by and through

counsel, unto this Honorable Court, affirms that a
Complaint was received from Defendant on February
11, 2019, and through counsel respectfully avers
that:

1. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 1 for want of

knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity thereof;
2. Defendant, ADMITS paragraph 2.
3. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 3 for want of
knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity thereof;
4. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 4 for want of
knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity thereof
5. Defendant, ADMITS paragraph 5 and further
elaborates that the property is classified as
Residential Regular, located in 213 Cicca
Street, Barangay Talamban.
6. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 6 with regard the
accuracy of the Zonal Value presented by the
Agency for such is not the same as that which
is reported by the Bureau of Internal Revenue
(BIR), which values the Defendant’s property
at Twenty Two Thousand and Five Hundred Pesos
(Php 22,500) per square meters, as it is
included in the El Dorado II Street to the
vicinity of Road to Canduman. This is
reflected in the Certified True Copy of the
BIR’s Zonal Values from Beatriz S. Pelino,
Assistant Division Chief of the Asset
Valuation Board, attached as Annex A; and as
reflected in the BIR website which is
accessible to the public and attached to this
document as Annex B.

Province : CEBU
City/Municipality : CEBU CITY D.O. No. 64-18
Effectivity
Zone/Barangay : TALAMBAN Dates 21-Dec-18

STREET NAME / 4th REVISION

SUBDIVISION/CONDOMINIUM VICINITY CLASS ZV/SQ.M.
STREETS
 ROAD TO
A BORBAJO ST CANDUMAN RR 17,500.00
EL DORADO II RR 22,500.00

Thus, the Zonal Value of the property should

be at Six Million Four Hundred Thousand and
Thirty Five Pesos (Php 6,435,000.00) for the
286 sq m.

7. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 7, THE PROPERTY IS

NOT INDISPENSABLE to the project as there is
a present main highway for access from Banilad
to Talamban. Also, presently, there are
various roads from Banilad-Talamban. In truth,
Plaintiff has not presented any proof of the
public use which they claim for the project.
No feasibility studies have been presented as
to the need to create the project on such a
route as to traverse the property of defendant
when there are other connecting roads from
Banilad to Talamban. There are only the
baseless claims of Plaintiff.
8. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 8 for want of
knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity thereof;
9. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 9 for the failure
of Plaintiff to follow Section 5 of REPUBLIC
ACT No. 10752, which provides for the
inclusion of the replacement cost of
structures and improvements on the property in
the total sum offered to Defendant.
10. Defendant, DENIES paragraph 10 as inconsistent
parts of REPUBLIC ACT 8974 has been expressly
 repealed by REPUBLIC ACT No. 10752 under
Section 16 thereof.
11. Defendant, DENIES that the Plaintiff has
complied with the procedure contemplated under
existing and effective laws for Negotiated
Sales which will allow them a valid deposit in
court to grant them a Writ of Possession.

DEFENSES

12. The Plaintiff does not have authority to

expropriate the property of Defendant:
a. For lack of compliance to Section 5 and
Section 6 of REPUBLIC ACT No. 10752.
b. While it is admitted that the Government
exercises the inherent powers of Eminent
Domain;
c. The existing and effective laws provide for
proper procedure.
d. Section 5 of RA 10752 provides for the Rules
on Negotiated Sale
i. The implementing agency may offer to
acquire, through negotiate sale, the
right-of-way site or location for a
national government infrastructure
project, under the following rules. The
implementing agency shall offer to the
property owner concerned, as
compensation price, the sum of:
1. The current market value of the
land,
2. The replacement cost of structures
and improvements therein; and
 3. The current market value of crops
and trees therein.
e. Plaintiff hereof, failed to include the
replacement cost of structures and
improvements located on the property during
the negotiations, hence, no valid
negotiation was initiated by Plaintiff, and
consequently, no color of authority was
vested to Plaintiff to file this present
complaint.
13. It is further submitted that the contradicting
evidence on Zonal Valuation should be
determined in favor of Defendant.
a. In REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HEIRS OF
GABRIEL Q. FERNANDEZ (G.R. No. 175493, March
25, 2015)provides:
“Since there was a discrepancy as to the two
certifications, reference must be made to
the zonal values posted by the Bureau of
Internal Revenue on their website, which are
accessible to the general public.”
14. It is further submitted that there is
presently, various connecting roads from
Banilad-Talamban, thus, there is no need for
Plaintiff to expropriate Defendant’s
property.

CONCLUSION

The defendant respectfully submits to the wisdom

of the Honorable Court its contention that the
Plaintiff does not have authority to expropriate the
property of Defendant for lack of proper procedure
of the Negotiation Sale.

It is further submitted that the Zonal Value

should be at Six Million Four Hundred Thousand and
Thirty Five Pesos (Php 6,435,000.00).

Moreover, that the presence of a main highway

and various connecting roads of the Banilad-Talamban
route, there is no need to appropriate Defendant’s
property.

Such lack of authority is a fatal defect which

should cause the dismissal of the complaint.

COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
The defendant incorporate by reference all the
foregoing allegations and further allege, that:

(a) Plaintiffs’ unfounded and reckless suit has

compelled Defendant to engage counsel for a
professional fee of ₱100,000.00. Moreover, in
consequence of this unjust suit, defendant
incurred, and will incur suit-related expenses
at no less than ₱300,000.00; all of which
defendant seeks recompense from plaintiffs by
way of damages.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises seriously considered, it is
prayed that the instant complaint be dismissed and
the Plaintiff be ordered to pay the defendant such
damages.

Defendant likewise pray for such other equitable

and just relief under these premises.

Cebu City, 11th day of February, 2019.

Atty. Carmela Guibone, CPA

PTR No. 2234360, 01/05/17,
Cebu City
IBP Life Member Roll No. 06969,
Cebu City
Roll of Attorneys No. 58869
MCLE Compliance No. II 555834;
03/15/2018

VERIFICATION WITH CERTIFICATION

I, MARIA JOSEFINA G. TATAD, of legal age,
Filipino citizen, single, and residing at 213 Cicca
Street, Barangay Talamban, Cebu City, after being
duly sworn to, hereby depose and say:

That I am the defendant in the above-entitled

Complaint;
 That I have caused the preparation and filing of
the foregoing Answer;

That I have read the foregoing Answer and the

allegations contained therein are true and correct
of my personal knowledge and belief;

That I have not commenced any other action or

proceeding involving the same issues in the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal
or agency;

That to the best of my knowledge and belief, no

such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal
or agency;

That if I should thereafter learn that a similar

action or proceeding has been filed or is pending
before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or
any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to report
that fact within five (5) days therefrom to this
Honorable Court.

MARIA JOSEFINA G. TATAD

Affiant
Republic of the Philippines)
City of Cebu ) S.S.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me on this 11th day

of February, 2019 at Cebu City, affiant exhibiting to
me his Passport No. EB2503221, issued on May 20, 2018
and valid until May 19, 2028.
Atty. Rick Asero XV
Notary Public
PTR No. 834360789 01/05/18, Cebu
Doc. No. 105; City
Page No. 55;
IBP Life Member Roll No. 06267, Cebu
Book No. 20;
City
Series of 2019.
Roll of Attorneys No. 58366

MCLE Compliance No. II 917834;

03/15/2018

Copy Furnished:
ATTY. LOUELLA N. TURA
Associate Solicitor
Legaspi Village, Makati
City