Ejectment; unlawful detainer; sample Answer.

The DEFENDANT xxx, by counsel, respectfully states:

I. ANSWER

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 1. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Complaint are admitted.

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT

X x x CITY 2. Paragraphs 2 to 6 of the Complaint are denied for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
veracity or falsity thereof, the allegations therein being matters known only to, and are within the control only, of the plaintiff.
BRANCH x x x

3. Paragraphs 7 to 9 of the Complaint are admitted.

X x x,
4. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint is denied for lack of knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity
Plaintiff or falsity of the alleged amounts of attorneys fees agreed upon between the plaintiff and her lawyer. The said paragraph is
likewise denied insofar as it alleges that the defendant has no basis or justification to occupy the subject property, the truth
Civil Case No. xxx being those alleged in the special and affirmative defenses part hereinbelow.

- Versus

Unlawful Detainer II. SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Xx x, etc.,

Defendants. 5. The title to and ownership in fee simple over the subject property is in the name of the Government Service Insurance
System (GSIS), its registered owner, and not the plaintiff. (See Annex A, Par. 3, Complaint).
x---------------------------------x

6. The plaintiff is not the owner in fee simple of the subject property, contrary to her allegation in Par. 3 of the Complaint.

ANSWER
7. The alleged Deed of Conditional Sale between the GSIS and the plaintiff is not annotated on the title on the property. (See
(In re: Summons, Received on dorsal side of the title of the property, marked as Annex A, Par. 3, Complaint).

xxx 2011)

8. Although the GSIS has given the plaintiff the right of possession of the property under Par. 4 of the Deed of Conditional
Sale (Annex B, Par. 4, Complaint), the plaintiff knew or was supposed to know or was deemed by law to be obligated to know
and to investigate the fact that at the time of her purchase of the property, the xxx Family were in possession of the property
and that it had a vested, beneficial and equitable right thereto by reason of Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) executed in
1975 between its original purchaser xxx, represented by xxx, on the one hand, and the matriarch of the xxx Family, i.e., xxx, on
the other.
IV. PRAYER
A copy of the said MOA is attached as Annex 1.

A copy of the Special Power of Attorney of xxx (1974) is attached as Annex 2 hereof.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the parties be given ample time to reach an amicable
settlement before the xxx City Mediation Center; and that in case of a failure thereof, and after trial, the complaint be
dismissed for lack of merit and the defendants compulsory counterclaim be granted, i.e.. attorneys fees of P20,000.00 plus
9. Since 1975 up to the present time, the xxx Family has been in possession of the subject property by reason of the said moral damages of P100,000.00, plus costs of suit.
MOA. This fact was known to plaintiff when she investigated the background property until the time she closed her purchase
thereof with the GSIS. There is no proof that plaintiff had reported the real situation of the property to the GSIS for a solution The defendant respectfully prays for such and other reliefs as may be deemed just and equitable in the premises.
or amicable settlement between the parties prior to her purchase thereof. Likewise, the GSIS did not send any investigator to
investigate the situation of the property prior to and at the time of its sale to the plaintiff. It did not issue any formal notice to xxx City, xxx 2011.
the defendant or the xxx Family about the impending attempt of the plaintiff to purchase the property. Had the xxx Family
been notified thereon, they would have taken urgent steps to acquire the same instead of the plaintiff.

10. In 2002, Sps. xxx, the parents of the herein defendant xxx, executed a Special Power of Attorney in favor of the LASERNA CUEVA-MERCADER LAW OFFICES
herein defendant, a copy of which is marked as Annex 3 hereof.
Counsel for Defendant xxx
11. The defendant had answered the demanded letter, dated xxx 2011, of the plaintiff through a letter, dated xxx 2011, of
defendants counsel, a copy of which is attached as Annex 4 hereof. It requested plaintiffs lawyer for a special conference to Unit 15, Star Arcade, C.V Starr Avenue
discuss a serious extrajudicial compromise, without admission of guilt on the part of the defendant. It was not formally
Philamlife Village, Las Pinas City 1740
answered by the plaintiff.

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.

12.GSIS is an (if not the) indispensable party in the suit being the registered owner in fee simple of the subject property. The
ownership rights of plaintiff under her unannotated Deed of Conditional Sale with the GSIS are merely inchoate and
Xxx
contingent. The Complaint shows no Board Resolution from the Board of Trustees of the GSIS empowering the plaintiff to sue
the defendant in behalf of the GSIS in the instant case.

III. COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM VERIFICATION

AND

13.By reason of the abuse of right committed by the plaintiff and by reason of the instant precipitate and unfounded suit, the ANTI-FORUM SHOPPINFG CERTIFICATION
defendant was constrained to hire the services of a lawyer to defend his rights and interests for a professional fee of
P20,000.00 plus P3,000.00 per court appearance;

14.Similarly, the plaintiffs unfounded suit has caused the defendant mental anguish and suffering and public humiliation and
embarrassment, for which the defendant claims moral damages of P100,000.00.
I, xxx, of legal age, married, Filipino, and with postal address c/o xxx, Barangay xxx, xxx Village, xxx, xxx City, under oath,
depose:
I am the defendant in the foregoing case; that I caused the preparation of the foregoing Answer; that I have read its contents;
and that the same are true and correct of my own direct, personal knowledge.
 Further, pursuant to Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and existing Supreme Court circulars, I hereby certify that
I have not heretofore 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, no such action or proceeding is pending in the Cc :
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency; and that if I should hereafter learn that other similar or
related actions or proceedings 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 court.
Atty. Xxx
xxx City, xxx 2011.
Counsel for Plaintiff

xxx Rm. xxx

xxx Bldg.
Xxx
Brgy. xxx, xxx City
Affiant/Defendant
Metro Manila
SSS Member ID No.
Reg. Rec. No.
xxx
Date PO
Issued on xxx 1975

SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me in xxx City on xxx 2011, the affiant showing his SSS Member ID Card as stated above
as competent proof of his identity. EXPLANATION

A copy of this pleading is served via registered mail, instead of via personal service, on the adverse counsel due to the
distance of his law office address and the lack of field staff of undersigned counsel at this time.

NOTARY PUBLIC

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.

Doc. No. ____

Page No. ____

Book No. ____

Series of 2011