Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11


Andrea Mae V. Manuzon, Represented by her Attorney-in-fact, Mar !e" Ca"!zo CIVIL CASE NO. 12 !" #or FORCIBLE ENTR# and DAMAGES $!% Pre"!&!nar' Manda%or' In(un)%!on or Te&*orar' Re+%ra!n!n, Order Plaintiff -$ers%sA"% ea A)e-e+, .r!+%e""a A,)oao"! and a"" o% er *er+on+ C"a!&!n, r!, %+ under % e&,

Defendants &--------------------------------------------------------&


'I() ALL *+E RES,EC( (O ()E )ONORA-LE CO+R(. COMES NO/ the PLAINTIFF, by and thro%.h the %ndersi.ned co%nse/, %nto her )onorab/e Co%rt, in s%pport for the iss%ance of the office of a /RIT OF PRELIMINAR# MANDATOR# INJUNCTION 0ost respectf%//y states that1 1 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.


2(he on/y iss%e in entry cases is the physica/ or 0ateria/ possession of rea/ property 3 possession de facto, not possession de 4%re. On/y prior physica/ possession, not tit/e, is the iss%e. If o5nership is raised in the p/eadin.s, the co%rt 0ay pass %pon s%ch 6%estion, b%t on/y to deter0ine the 6%estion of possession. T e o$ner+ !* )"a!& o0 de0endan%+ u*on % e "and !+ -a+ed on % e e1!den)e % e' *re+en%ed. T e!r e1!den)e, o$e1er, d!d no% +2uare"' addre++ % e !++ue o0 *r!or *o++e++!on. E1en !0 % e' +u))eed !n *ro1!n, % a% % e' are % e o$ner+ o0 % e "and, % e 0a)% re&a!n+ % a% % e' a1e no% a""e,ed or *ro1ed % a% % e' a1e no% a""e,ed or *ro1ed % a% % e' * '+!)a""' *o++e++ !% -' 1!r%ue o0 +u) o$ner+ !*. On % e o% er and, *"a!n%!00 *r!or *o++e++!on o0 % e "and $a+ no% d!+*u%ed -' % e CA, $ !) &ere"' de+)r!-ed !+ a+ u+ur*a%!on.


(his is an action for E7EC8EN( 9#orcib/e Entry: 5ith an %r.ent prayer for the iss%ance of 'rit of pre/i0inary 0andatory in4%nction iss%e to restore p/aintiff in possession of the Lot ;21!. (his is an anchored on the act of defendants in enterin. the property o5ned and in possession of p/aintiff 5itho%t the /atter<s consent, 5ith force, threat, and inti0idation %pon the person of p/aintiff<s Attorney-in-fact and the /atter<s co0panions, and despite the fact that defendants are f%//y a5are that the s%b4ect /ot is o5ned and possessed by p/aintiff Andrea 8ae V. 8an%=on as e$idenced by (a& *ec/aration No. ;;>;?@.

2 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.


1. ,/aintiff is represented by her Atty-in-fact, p%rs%ant to a specia/ po5er of Attorney e&ec%ted and acAno5/ed.e before Notary ,%b/ic, and she is of /e.a/ a.e, sin./e, #i/ipino citi=en and a resident of (ar/ac, b%t for p%rposes of this s%it, notices, orders, and processes of the )onorab/e Co%rt be f%rnished the %ndersi.ned co%nse/ in the office address indicated be/o5 his na0e1 2. *efendants and a// the other defendants are a// of /e.a/ a.es, 0arried, #i/ipinos, and 5ith residence of (ar/ac, 5here they 0ay be ser$ed 5ith s%00ons and other co%rt processesB


. ,/aintiff is the co-o5ner of Lot ;21!, 5ith an area of 1!,;;; s6%are 0eters, sit%ated in Iba San 7ose, (ar/ac City, ,hi/ippines, co$ered by (a& *ec/aration No. ;;>;?@. !. On Apri/ 2C, 1>>@, p/aintiff passed by said Lot ;21! on his 5ay to San 7ose ,%b/ic 8arAet and he noticed persons 5ho forcib/y entered said Lot 1;?@@ by destroyin. the fence and started erectin. a str%ct%re thereon. ". 'hen p/aintiff .ot near, defendants and their 5orAers threatened hi0 5ith har0 sho%/d he interfere 5ith their 5orA. C. ,/aintiff re6%ested defendants and their 5orAers to stop the constr%ction of a str%ct%re inside the said Lot, b%t defendants and their 5orAers ref%sed to stop their constr%ction. (hen ,/aintiff reported the 0atter to the Do$ern0ent A%thorities of San 7ose, (ar/ac City and re6%ested assistance in stoppin. said constr%ction %ndertaAen by defendants inside the said Lot of ,/aintiff. 3 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

@. (hat the 8%nicipa/ En.ineer to.ether 5ith so0e po/ice0en of San 7ose, (ar/ac City, 5ent to the p/ace 5here the Lot is sit%ated and they stopped the constr%ction %ndertaAen by defendants. ?. )o5e$er, on the s%cceedin. days, defendants contin%ed 5ith constr%ction of the str%ct%re inside p/aintiff<s Lot, despite p/aintiff<s $ehe0ent protest and >. (hat constr%ction %ndertaAen by defendants inside p/aintiff<s Lot is 5itho%t the Ano5/ed.e and consent of neither p/aintiff nor his co-o5ners. 1;. ,/aintiff bro%.ht the 0atter before the -aran.ay A%thorities for conci/iation, b%t no sett/e0ent 5as arri$ed at the -aran.ay A%thorities, and 11. (hat p/aintiff has been co0pe//ed by defendants to /iti.ate to enforce his ri.hts and to en.a.e the ser$ices of co%nse/ for the s%0 of 2;,;;;. 12. (hat the reasonab/e co0pensation for the %se and occ%pation by defendants of p/aintiff<s said Lot ;21! is 1",;;; per 0onth.


1 . (hat ,/aintiff hereby reprod%ced a// the a//e.ations of the precedin. para.raphs insofar as they are 0ateria/ to iss%ance of the 5rit of pre/i0inary 0andatory in4%nction. 1!. (hat %nder the pro$isions of Artic/e " > of the Ci$i/ Code of the ,hi/ippines and Section , R%/e @;, Re$ised R%/es of Co%rt, p/aintiff sho%/d be restored to the possession of said Lot ;21!.

4 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

1". (hat p/aintiff is ready, ab/e and 5i//in. to post a bond to be fi&ed by this )onorab/e Co%rt to ans5er for any and a// da0a.es in the e$ent that the )onorab/e Co%rt fina//y ad4%d.e that p/aintiff is entit/ed thereto FACTS IN SUPPORT OF THE ISSUNACE OF A /RIT OF PRELIMINAR# MANDATOR# INJUNCTION

1C. (hat beca%se of the destroyin. of the fence and started erectin. a str%ct%re thereon co00itted by the abo$e na0ed defendants, p/aintiff and her a.ents are no5 bein. contin%o%s/y depri$ed and en4oined of the %se and en4oy0ent of the pre0ises, and their contin%ed depri$ation has ca%sed p/aintiff to be dispossessed of the pre0ises and their p/ans to f%rther i0pro$e the sa0e has been de/ayed and denied by the har0 bein. physica//y and act%a//y co00itted by the abo$e na0ed defendants, s%ch that e$en the coheirs of p/aintiff Andrea 8ae V. 8an%=on are /iAe5ise denied access theretoB 1@. (hat the area bein. i//e.a//y occ%pied by defendants ca%sin. the dispossession of p/aintiff and her a.ents, is a0on. others, 5ithin the fo//o5in. /ot, to 5it1 Lot ;21! 5ith an area of 0ore or /ess 1!,;;; s6%are 0eters Co$ered by (a& *ec/aration No. ;;>;?@ 1?. (hat Lot 1;?@@ 5hich is co$ered by (a& *ec/aration No. ;;>;?@ of the Re.istry of *eeds of the ,ro$ince of (ar/ac in the na0e of Andrea 8ae V. 8an%=on, 5here a road has been introd%ced by p/aintiff has been destroyed the b/ocAed by defendants in the %pper and /o5er portion 5ith a fence, 5hi/e the rest, as abo$e-0entioned is bein. i//e.a//y occ%pied by defendants. 1>. (hat the act of defendants in destroyin. the fence to enter the said /ot has depri$ed p/aintiff and her a.ents b/ocA to and fro0 the property of p/aintiffB

5 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

2;. (hat the acts res%/tin. to the dispossession of p/aintiff o$er the s%b4ect /ot is contin%in., and if defendants are not stopped fro0 f%rther introd%cin. i0pro$e0ents thereto or if not restrained fro0 contin%o%s/y occ%pyin. the pre0ises, p/aintiff 5i// /ater be co0p/ete/y dispossessed of the pre0ises. ISSUES /HETHER OR NOT PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER POSSESSION THE SUBJECT PROPERT# /HETHER OR NOT THE COMPLAINT FILED B# PLAINTIFF TO DEFENDANTS MA# BE DISMISSED FOR LAC. OF CAUSE OF ACTION AND JURISDICTION /HETHER OR NOT THE MTC HAS A JURISDICTION OVER THE CASE


1. On the first iss%e1 THERE PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER POSSESSION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERT# (he app/ication for te0porary restrainin. order andEor sho%/d be .ranted as there is an irreparab/e in4%ry to be s%stained by p/aintiff. (his is an action for forcib/e entry. ,/aintiff is bein. disp/aced by defendants 5itho%t defendants a5aitin. the fina/ disposition of the 0ain action for forcib/e entry. (he Supreme Court consistent/y stressed in a /on. /ine of cases, th%s1 2(he $ery fo%ndation of the 4%risdiction to iss%e 5rit of in4%nction rests in the e&istence of a ca%se of action and in the probabi/ity of irreparab/e in4%ry, in ade6%acy of 6 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

pec%niary co0pensation and the pre$ention of the 0%/tip/icity of s%its. 'here facts are not sho5n to brin. the case 5ithin these conditions, the re/ief of in4%nction sho%/d be ref%sed. #or the co%rt to iss%e a 5rit of pre/i0inary in4%nction, the petitioner 5as b%rdened to estab/ish the fo//o5in.1 91: a ri.ht in esse or a c/ear and %n0istaAab/e ri.ht to be protectedB 92: a $io/ation of that ri.htB 9 : that there is an %r.ent and per0anent act and %r.ent necessity for the 5rit to pre$ent serio%s da0a.e. (h%s, in the absence of a c/ear /e.a/ ri.ht, the iss%ance of the in4%ncti$e 5rit constit%tes a .ra$e ab%se of discretion. 'here the p/aintiff<s ri.ht is a do%btf%/ or disp%ted, in4%nction is not proper. In4%nction is a preser$ati$e re0edy ai0ed at protectin. s%bstantia/ ri.hts and interests. It is not desi.ned to protect contin.ent or f%t%re ri.hts. (he possibi/ity of irreparab/e da0a.e 5itho%t proof of ade6%ate e&istin. ri.hts is not a .ro%nd for in4%nction.F

In the case at bar, ,/aintiff Andrea 8ae V. 8an%=on, is c/ear/y in possession of the pre0ises. She had i0pro$e0ents pre$ai/in. thereto, inc/%din. str%ct%res and fences, she has a ri.ht to be protected and respected and that in$o/$es its %se and en4oy0ent of the pre0ises and its fr%its. )er possession is pres%0ed to be in .ood faith and s%ch possession has to be respected %n/ess fina//y pro$en other5ise in the Co%rts of La5.

2. On the second iss%e1 THE PLAINTIFF HAS A VALID RIGHT OVER THE SUBJECT PROPERT# (he co0p/aint a.ainst the defendants cannot be set aside and dis0issed. -eca%se the /ot s%b4ect 0atter of the abo$e-entit/ed case is in no do%bt co$ered by transfer certificates of tit/e in the na0e of p/aintiff 5ith the re.istry of deeds of the ,ro$ince of (ar/ac. (he said

7 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

/ot is $erified and $a/idated to be consistent 5ith the (it/e by the (a& *ec/aration No. ;;>;?@. ,/aintiff has been in possession of the s%b4ect property. *efendants, in their ans5er contended that p/aintiff 2is not a co-o5ner of the s%b4ect property, that it bein. o5ned by the .o$ern0ent, as said property is a p%b/ic /and. *efendants a/so ar.%ed that it is the *epart0ent of A.rarian Refor0 property, bein. an a.ric%/t%ra/ /and, is 5ithin the ad0inistration and disposition of the *epart0ent of A.rarian Refor0 5hich 5i// a5ard it to 6%a/ified beneficiaries s%ch as defendants. (he /ot in 6%estion is no5 %nder e&ca$ation, destr%ction, and occ%pation by the defendants. (he ri.ht of p/aintiff has been $io/ated. She is no5 bein. %nreasonab/y denied of its en4oy0ent and possession, a ri.ht that is protected by /a5, it sho%/d be noted that it is a estab/ished 4%rispr%dence in e4ect0ent cases that 2the /e.a/ ri.ht thereto is not essentia/ to the possessor<s ca%se of action for no one 0ay taAe the /a5 into his hands and forcib/y e4ect another or depri$e her of her possession by stea/th e$en if her tit/e thereto or act%a//y disp%ted in another case.F In Lopez vs. Hon. Santiago 9L-!1??>, Apri/ 2", 1>C;: it 5as said that 2,%b/ic interest, p%b/ic po/icy and p%b/ic order de0and that the party in peacef%/ possession of the /and, re.ard/ess of 5hether it is pri$ate or is part of the p%b/ic do0ain, be not o%sted therefro0 by 0eans of force, $io/ence, or inti0idation, re.ard/ess of the 6%a/ity of his a//e.ed ri.ht to the possession thereof, and that 5hoe$er c/ai0s to ha$e a better tit/e or ri.ht thereto sho%/d seeA fro0 the proper a%thorities the /e.a/ re0edies estab/ished therefore instead of taAin. the /a5 into their handsB *efendants, e$en ass%0in. that they are the o5ners, co%/d not si0p/y taAe possession of the property by p%ttin. the /a5 into their hands. (hey ha$e to .o to co%rt and %ti/i=e the co%rts of /a5 in enforcin. their ri.hts, if they ha$e any. (he Supreme Court said in a re/ated case, th%s1

of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

2'e stress that the iss%e of o5nership in e4ect0ent cases is to be reso/$ed on/y 5hen it is inti0ate/y intert5ined 5ith the iss%e of possession, to s%ch an e&tent that the 6%estion of 5ho had prior possession cannot be deter0ined 5itho%t r%/in. on the 6%estion of 5ho the o5ner of the /and is. No s%ch intert5ine0ent has been sho5n in the case before %s. Since defendant<s c/ai0 of o5nership is not bein. 0ade in order to pro$e prior possession, the e4ect0ent co%rt cannot intr%de or d5e// %pon the iss%e of o5nership. Drantin. that p/aintiff i//e.a//y entered into and occ%pied the property in 6%estion, defendants had no ri.ht to taAe the /a5 into their o5n hands and s%00ari/y of forcib/y e4ect the occ%pants therefro0. Verify, e$en if p/aintiff 5ere 0ere %s%rpers of the /and o5ned by p%b/ic do0ain, sti// they are entit/ed to re0ain on it %nti/ they care /a5f%//y e4ected therefro0. +nder appropriate circ%0stances, defendants 0ay fi/e, other than an e4ect0ent s%it, an accion p%b/icianaGa p/enary action intended to reco$er the better ri.ht to possessB or an accion rei$indicatoriaGan action to reco$er o5nership of rea/ property. (he thin. to be pro$en in an action for forcib/e entry is prior 0ateria/ possession, and that the sa0e 5as /ost thro%.h force, inti0idation, threat, strate.y or stea/th, so that it behoo$es the co%rt to restore possession re.ard/ess of tit/e or o5nership. (he S%pre0e Co%rt said in the case of Dizon vs. Concina, et al., 9 ; SCRA ?>@:, that 5here a person s%pposes hi0se/f to be the o5ner of a piece of /and and desires to $indicate his

o5nership a.ainst the person act%a//y in possession it is inc%0bent %pon hi0 to instit%te an action to this end in a co%rt of co0petent 4%risdictionB and he cannot be per0itted, by in$adin. the property and e&c/%din. the act%a/ possessor to p/ace %pon the /atter the b%rden of instit%tin. to try the property ri.ht.F (his is e&act/y 5hat happened in the caseB defendants in$aded the property and e&c/%ded the p/aintiff 5ho is in act%a/ possession of the s%b4ect /ot. (he in$asion is not 0ere/y e0inent b%t 5as act%a/ 5ith the iss%e of force and inti0idation. (he destroyin. of the fence and startin. to erect a str%ct%re thereon by defendants are a// recent. ! of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

. On the third Iss%e1 THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT HAS A JURISDICTION OVER EJECTMENT CASES. (he 8%nicipa/ (ria/ Co%rt can r%/e on forcib/e entry cases, this )onorab/e Co%rt is s%b4ect to ans5er for any and a// da0a.es of the p/aintiff and that the )onorab/e Co%rt is to r%/e o$er this case of forcib/e entry and that p/aintiff is entit/ed thereto. (he 8%nicipa/ (ria/ Co%rt therefore has a 4%risdiction to re.%/ate o$er the said e4ect0ent case. P R A # E R /HEREFORE, it is respectf%//y prayed that after the fi/in. of the case and %pon postin. of the bond to be fi&ed by this )onorab/e Co%rt, a 5rit of pre/i0inary 0andatory in4%nction iss%e to restore p/aintiff in possession of said Lot ;21! and be i00ediate/y iss%ed prohibitin. the abo$e-na0ed defendants fro0 intr%din. into the pre0ises and f%rther order defendants to discontin%e the constr%ction o$er the said pre0ises of the p/aintiff. Other re/iefs 4%st and e6%itab/e %nder the pre0ises are /iAe5ise prayed for. ,ro$ince of (ar/ac, for Iba San 7ose, ,hi/ippines, 1!th of Septe0ber, 2;11.

MAE ANN #U3ON BADUA Co%nse/ for ,/aintiff ,(R No. 12 !"C@,-; - 1-11, (ar/ac I-, No. ;21!12, ; - 1-11, (ar/ac 8CLE CO8,LIANCE NO. 111-;;;;!;@B 8ay 1;, 2;;? -A*+A AN* ,AR(NERS LA' O##ICES Roo0 1!,

#/oor, Lope= -%i/din.,

San 7ose/, (ar/ac City

1" of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.

T e C"er4 o0 Cour% Mun!)!*a" Tr!a" Cour% o0 Tar"a) C!%' T !rd Jud!)!a" Re,!on Tar"a), Tar"a) C!%'

Dreetin.sH ,/ease s%b0it the abo$e-0entioned ,osition ,aper for the consideration of this )onorab/e Co%rt i00ediate/y %pon receipt thereof.

Copy f%rnished by re.istered 0ai/1 A/thea Acebes et, a/. San 7ose, (ar/ac

A%%'. Mae Ann #. Badua


A copy of this p/eadin. has been f%rnished to defendants by 5ay of re.istered 0ai/ d%e to distance and for /acA of office personne/ to effect persona/ ser$ice.

A%%'. Mae Ann #. Badua

11 of 12 Position Paper Civil Case No. 12345 Manuzon vs. Acebes et, al.