REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 102-QUEZON CITY

MARIETES D. ROLLUSTA- DE LEON

Petitioner,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. R-QZN-17-08216-CV

FOR: DECLARATION OF NULLITY
OF VOID (BIGAMOUS) MARRIAGE
JOVEN G. DE LEON
Respondent.
x-----------------------------------------------x

DECISION

Petitioner instituted this action for the declaration nullity of her marriage to
Respondent by reason of subsistence of previous marriages pursuant to Article 41 of the
Family Code and all the concomitant legal consequences thereof.

This Court issued the Summons requiring respondent, within fifteen (15) days
after the service of the same, to file to the Court and serve on the Petitioner Answer to the
Petition or any responsive pleading. In compliance with Section 5(4) A.M No. 02-11-10-
SC, the Office of the Solicitor General and Public Prosecutor was furnished a copy of the
petition and its annexes.

In spite of diligent efforts exerted to serve summons personally on the respondent,

the same failed and unavailing as respondent cannot be served promptly in person for,
according to his sister, the respondent had migrated to the United States of America for
almost a year. On August 15, 2017, substituted service thru Respondent Joven G. De
Leon’s sister, Elizabeth De Leon Gania, a person of suitable age and discretion residing
thereat was resorted to as per Sheriff’s Return of Summons on August 17, 2017. The
Respondent, however, failed to file any responsive pleading in relation to such petition
neither did he appear in court at any time.

Pursuant to a Motion for Collusion Hearing, as filed by the petitioner thru counsel
and upon finding the same to be well taken by this Court, Assistant City Prosecutor
Arleen Tagaban was then directed to appear in behalf of the state, to conduct an
investigation for the determination whether collusion exists between the parties, to
subsequently submit this report thereon within one month after receipt thereof as
mandated under Section 9 of the above A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, and to take care that
evidence was not fabricated.

Through the Investigation Report submitted by the public prosecutor to the effect
that no collusion existed between the parties, pretrial conference was then scheduled on
January 25, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. However, the same was cancelled and was reset on
February 1, 2018 at 8:30 a.m.
Decision
Civil Case No. R-QZN-17-08216-CV
Marietes D. Rolusta-De Leon vs. Joven G. De Leon
May , 2019
x---------------------------------------------------------------------x

During pre-trial, Public Prosecutor Arleen T. Tagaban, Atty Joenel R. Competente,

counsel for the petitioner appeared in Court. There was no appearance on the part of the
respondent. Counsel for the petitioner manifested that they already submitted their Pre-
trial Brief and that they are adopting the contents of the same.

During the pre-trial, the following documents were marked to wit:

PROVISIONAL:
Exhibit A - Certificate of Marriage of Parties
Exhibit B - Advisory on Marriages
Exhibit C - Certificate of Live Birth of Joven Jeremiah De Leon
Exhibit C-1 - Certificate of Live Birth of Ma. Teresa De Leon
Exhibit C-2 - Certificate of Live Birth of Rafael Joven De Leon
Exhibit D - Certificate of Marriage of Respondent Joven G. De Leon
and
Jovita Punzalan (provisional)
Exhibit E - Certificate of Marriage of Respondent Joven G. De Leon
and
Eden B. Chavez

RESERVED
Exhibit F - Judicial Affidavit of Petitioner Marietes D. Rolusta- De
Leon

On February 12, 2018, the Office of the Solicitor General filed a Notice of
Appearance authorizing the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City to appear in this
case. Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.

Petitioner Ma. Asuncion Tungpalan-Somigao then executed a Judicial Affidavit 1

stating among others the factual basis seeking the nullity of her marriage to the
respondent. She further confirmed and affirmed the truthfulness of the contents of her
Affidavit stating among others that on November 27, 1992, Petitioner married
Respondent2.

She met Respondent sometime in March 1991 while he was working as an Agent
for Alaska Milk and he would often eat lunch in a Carinderia where she was residing with
her parents. They both attended the birthday party of the owner of the Carinderia in
which he started to court her. They officially became a couple a day after her birthday.
She and Respondent would often date a lot and go out after her work. Then, she
discovered that she was pregnant with their first child. They decided to get married. They
have spawned three (3) children. Their first child, Joven Jeremiah Rolusta De Leon, was
born on May 26, 1993, as per his Certificate of Live Birth 3. Their second child, Ma.
Theresa Rolusta De Leon, was born on March 28, 1995, as per her Certificate of Live
Birth4. Their third and last child, Rafael Joven De Leon, was born on April 15, 1997, as

1Exhibit F
2 Exhibit A
3 Exhibit C
4 Exhibit C-1

Page | 2
Decision
Civil Case No. R-QZN-17-08216-CV
Marietes D. Rolusta-De Leon vs. Joven G. De Leon
May , 2019
x---------------------------------------------------------------------x

per his Certificate of Live Birth5. Petitioner found out of Respondent’s prior existing
marriage after the birth of their third child. She felt betrayed since Respondent never
informed her of the existence to two (2) prior marriages and he assured her from the very
beginning that he was never married before. Respondent admitted his first marriage to
Jovita Punzalan and asked for her forgiveness. However, he denied his second marriage
with Eden Chavez so she decided to secure the documents from the Philippine Statistics
Office to prove that Respondent has two (2) prior subsisting marriages to Jovita B.
Punzalan and Eden B. Chavez, respectively. Petitioner was able to secure a copy of
Certificate of Marriage6 of Respondent Joven G. De Leon and Jovita Punzalan,
Certificate of Marriage7 of Respondent and Eden Chavez and Advisory on Marriages 8
detailing Respondent’s two (2) prior marriages. Petitioner and Respondent has been
living their separate lives since she discovered that she was his third wife.

On cross examination by SACP Arleen T. Tagaban, she further testified that she
learned of Respondent’s previous marriages after she gave birth from her third son 9
during which their relationship was already on the rocks. Respondent was accusing her
that his third son was not his son since he was assigned to Pampanga and Olongapo. They
had fights every now and then, and Respondent was not coming home anymore. Since
she needed the money to support her kids and he is nowhere to be found, she asked,
along with his other sister Ate Edna, the one in the United States, Respondent’s sister,
Elizabeth De Leon Gania. Elizabeth informed her that he had other families and that
Respondent and Jovita Punzalan got separated in 1988 after their marriage and after
giving birth to their first child, and that Jovita Punzalan made a Death Certificate of
Joven so that she can marry another. Petitioner did not know of the previous marriage
since they did not have Certificate of No Marriage (CENOMAR) then. It was only 2010
when Friendster was created and she found Abby De Leon, his daughter form another
wife. But, Respondent denied having been married to Eden saying it was a fake marriage
just so the baby will be blessed and to use his last name. Respondent is now in the United
States, married to another woman.10

The next witness presented by petitioner was PSA Representative Benjamin S.

Torres11, who testified that he is testifying pursuant to the Subpoena Duces Tecum and Ad
Testificandum issued by this Court on June 1, 2018,. He handed over :
1. Original Copy of Marriage Contract of Marietes D. Rolusta De Leon and Joven
De Leon which was reserved to be marked as Exhibit A.
2. Original Copy of Marriage Contract of Joven De Leon and Jovita Punzalan with
register number 85-2059 which was reserved to be marked as Exhibit B wherein
there is an annotation regarding the decision relative to the declaration of
presumptive death and an annotation regarding the declaration of nullity of
marriage which was reserved to be marked as Exhibit B-1. The annotation states
that pursuant to the decision dated March 18, 2006 rendered by Judge Eugenio
M. Tangonan Jr. of the Regional Trial Court, Second Judicial Region, Branch 33
Balesteros Cagayan under Civil Case No. 33-364B-2005, the marriage between

5 Exhibit C-2
6 Exhibit D
7 Exhibit E
8 Exhibit B
9 TSN dated March 8, 2018, page 7
10 TSN dated March 8, 2018, page 7
11 Exhibit H and I

Page | 3
Decision
Civil Case No. R-QZN-17-08216-CV
Marietes D. Rolusta-De Leon vs. Joven G. De Leon
May , 2019
x---------------------------------------------------------------------x

Joven De Leon and Jovita Punzalan De Leon celebrated on November 11, 1986 is
hereby declared NULL and VOID AB INITIO.
3. Original Copy of Marriage Contract of Joven De Leon and Jovita Punzalan which
was remarked to Exhibit G wherein there is a remark which was marked as
Exhibit G-1 stating that pursuant to the Resolution dated January 26, 2001
rendered by Judge Ofella Tuazon Pinto of the Regional Trial Court, Third Judicial
Region, Branch 60, Angeles City under Special Proceeding Number 5929, the
absentee Joven De Leon is hereby declared presumptively death.
4. Original Copy of Marriage Contract of Joven De Leon and Eden B. Chavez
previously marked as Exhibit E with annotation, sub-marked as Exhibit E-1,
stating that pursuant to the Decision dated June 2, 2005, rendered by Judge
Eugenio M. Tangonan, Jr. of the Regional Trial Court, Second Judicial Region
Branch 33, Ballesteros, Cagayan under Civil Case No. 33-349B-2005, the
marriage between Joven De Leon and Eden B. Chavez celebrated on January 16,
1990 is hereby declared null and void ab initio.

He further testified that the two (2) previous marriages were nullified after the
celebration of marriage of Petitioner and Respondent. He was not able to hand the
Certificate of No Death of Jovita Punzalan and Eden B. Chavez for Assistant National
Statistician Ma’am Orcillas was on official business when witness went to the Civil
Registration Service Office, one who is responsible to print the same. Counsel, Atty.
Competente, requested for another subpoena which the Court granted. The case was
scheduled for a reset on September 6, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. 12

On September 6, 2018 as a continuation of his testimony, PSA Representative

Benjamin S. Torres brought Certificate of No Death of Eden Billo Chavez and/or
Eden Chavez De Leon marked as Exhibit J, and Certificate of No Death of Jovita
Bengco Punzalan and/or Jovita Punzalan De Leon marked as Exhibit K, stating that
the two (2) persons are still alive .

On cross examination, witness stated that Petitioner is the third wife of the
Respondent and that both first and second wife of Respondent are still alive.13

On October 2, 2018, Petitioner Marietes D. Rolusta-De Leon, through the

undersigned counsel de officio and to this Honorable Court, filed her FORMAL
OFFER OF DOCUMENTARY EXHIBITS in which the following were offered:

Exhibit A - Certificate of Marriage Registry No 92-32037

Exhibit B - Advisory on Marriages
Exhibit C - Certificate of Live Birth of Joven Jeremiah R. De Leon-
Registry No. 93-27302
Exhibit C-1 - Certificate of Live Birth of Ma. Theresa R. De Leon –
Registry No. 95-20352
Exhibit C-2 - Certificate of Live Birth of Rafael Joven R. De Leon-
Registry No. 97-22886
Exhibit D - Certificate of Marriage between Respondent and Jovita
Punzalan
Exhibit E - Certificate of Marriage between Repondent and Eden B.
12 TSN dated August 7, 2018
13 TSN dated September 6, 2018

Page | 4
Decision
Civil Case No. R-QZN-17-08216-CV
Marietes D. Rolusta-De Leon vs. Joven G. De Leon
May , 2019
x---------------------------------------------------------------------x

Chavez
Exhibit F - Judicial Affidavit of Petitioner
Exhibit G - Certificate of Marriage Between Respondent and Jovita
Punzalan
Exhibit H - Special Order No. 2018-01NS049 issued by the PSA
Exhibit K - Certificate of No Death of Jovita Punzalan
Exhibit L - Certificate of No Death of Eden Chavez

However, a review of the Formal Offer shows that Exhibit F (Judicial Affidavit of
Petitioner) has no marking but offered in the Formal Offer of Evidence. It also shows that
there are two(2) markings of Exhibit B(1) Advisory on Marriages and (2) Marriage
Contract of Respondent Joven De Leon to Jovita Punzalan. Thus, the Court the Petition,
through an Order directed Petitioner through her counsel to coordinate before the Branch
Clerk of Court and have Exhibit F (Judicial Affidavit of the Petitioner) marked, Exhibit
B(1) Advisory on Marriages and (2) Marriage Contract of Respondent Joven De Leon to
Jovita Punzalan within ten(10) days and to submit Compliance thereafter. Public
prosecutor was given fifteen(15) days from receipt to file their comment and/or
opposition thereto.

The Compliance filed by Petitioner thru counsel was duly Noted. Since Formal
Offer of Documentary Exhibits filed by petitioner, through counsel, and there being no
comment/opposition thereto filed by the respondent not the Public Prosecutor, despite a
period of time given, the Court admitted Exhibits “A” to “K”, with their sub-markings as
part of evidence and testimony of the petitioner. There being no Memorandum filed by
petitioner, despite period of time given, the entitled case was submitted for decision.

ISSUE

Whether or not marriage of Petitioner and Respondent be declared NULL and

VOID being a bigamous one

COURT’S RULING

With the first and second marriage still legally subsisting, the third marriage entered into
by the Petitioner with the Respondent was necessarily bigamous one. Article 35 (4) of the
Family states:

“Article 35 (4) of the Family Code provides that:

“The following marriages shall be void from the Beginning:

xxxl……”

(4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not failing under Article 41.
xxx…”

Article 41 of the Family Code states:

xxx...A marriage contracted by any person during the subsistence of a previous marriage
shall be null and void, unless before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior
spouse had been absent for four consecutive years and the spouse present had a well-
founded belief that the absent spouse was already dead. xxx

Page | 5
Decision
Civil Case No. R-QZN-17-08216-CV
Marietes D. Rolusta-De Leon vs. Joven G. De Leon
May , 2019
x---------------------------------------------------------------------x

There being no circumstances which bring the marriage between the petitioner and
respondent within the purview of Article 41, this Court believes, and so holds that the
marriage between petitioner and respondent is null and void. The marriage between
petitioner and respondent does not fall under the exceptional circumstances in Article 41
and, thus, the union between them bears the hallmarks of a bigamous marriage.

In the instant case, it is clear from the evidence presented that the respondent
contracted three marriages, first, with one JOVITA PUNZALAN, on November 11, 1986
in Angeles City, second, with one, EDEN CHAVEZ on January 15, 1990 in Quezon City,
and lastly, with the Petitioner MARIETES D. ROLUSTA on November 27, 1992 in
Carmona, Cavite. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent bears the
hallmarks of a bigamous marriage. The first two (2) marriages of the respondent with
JOVITA PUNZALAN and EDEN CHAVEZ were declared null and void only after the
celebration of the marriage of Petitioner and Respondent. Neither was there a record from
the Philippine Statistics Office showing that the first two wives of the respondent were
already dead.
Clearly, respondent contracted three marriages which necessarily nullified the latter.
Respondent evidently violated the proscription against contracting marriage for the third
time when his two marriages are still subsisting.

The inaction of the respondent to the petition negates whatever justification he may
have in contracting her marriage to herein petitioner. While she was given wide latitude
to appear and contest the petition, she opted to keep mum and let the petition remained
uncontested for unknown reason.

The Philippines Statistics Office’s copy of certification confirms the existence of

three (3) marriages entered into by the respondent where the first two, with JOVITA
PUNZALAN and EDEN CHAVEZ has only been dissolved, annulled or declared null and
void after the concurrence of the third marriage.
The Court, after petitioner having established by preponderance of evidence his
cause of action, is fully convinced that the marriage contract between him and respondent
warrants declaration of nullity in accordance with Article 35(4) of the Family Code.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, judgement is hereby rendered declaring

the marriage between petitioner and respondent solemnized on 08 May 2017 at Malakas
Street, Barangay Central, Diliman, Quezon City, NULL AND VOID AB INITIO, it being
a bigamous/polygamous one

There being no properties to be liquidated, partitioned or distributed between the

parties, the Court shall issue a Decree of Absolute Nullity when the finality of this
Decision shall expire after fifteen (15) days from notice thereof was sent to the parties.

Let a copies of this Decision be served to the parties and furnish the same to Japan
Embassy, Makati City, The Department of Foreign Affairs, Pasay City, Office of the
Solicitor General and the Public Prosecutor, and to the Local Civil Registrar of Quezon
City where the marriage took place and to the Local Civil Registrar of Quezon City
where the Court is located and the Philippines Statistics Authority for recording in their
Registry of Marriages.

SO ORDERED

Page | 6
Decision
Civil Case No. R-QZN-17-08216-CV
Marietes D. Rolusta-De Leon vs. Joven G. De Leon
May , 2019
x---------------------------------------------------------------------x

Done in Quezon City, this day of May, 2019.

MA. LOURDES A. GIRON

Presiding Judge

Page | 7