REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Marcelo B. Fernan Palace of Justice
Branch 61, Dakit, Bogo City, Cebu

DONALD C. ASINGUA,
Petitioner,

CIVIL CASE NO. BOGO-03723

FOR: DECLARATION OF NULLITY
OF MARRIAGE
- versus -

ROSEMINDA EDUARDO ASINGUA,

Respondent.

X--------------------------x

ANSWER WITH MOTION TO DISMISS

COMES NOW, RESPONDENT, by and through the undersigned

counsel, and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully alleges: THAT
-

1. Paragraph 1 of the Petition is partially admitted considering that

Petitioner deliberately abandoned the Respondent and refused to live
with the Respondent and their child. Thus, the Petitioner is not a resident
of Talisay, Santa Fe Cebu.

2. Paragraphs 2 to 5 of the Petition are hereby ADMITTED.

3. Paragraph 6 of the Petition is partially admitted in so far as the

parties enjoyed a smooth, stable and harmonious relationship. Fact is,
the couple have been living together for almost 20 years and have been
boyfriend/girlfriend for almost 7 years before getting married. But
hereby denied the fact of the reason of their marital rift. The couple
suddenly broke its harmonious relationship sometime in 2018 or just last
year when the Petitioner hastily and thoughtlessly cut off his allotment
to the Respondent, and for reasons hereinafter mentioned in the Special
and Affirmative Defenses.

1
 4.Paragraphs 7 to 29 of the Petition are hereby SPECIFICALLY
DENIED, for reason hereinafter mentioned in the Special and Affirmative
Defenses, and by way of -

SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Defendant hereby repleads and incorporates all the material

allegations found in the preceding paragraphs and hereby further
alleges: THAT –

5. This instant case shall be dismissed by reason of non

compliance of the October 2, 2018 Resolution issued by the Supreme
Court en banc on the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void
Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages otherwise known as A.M.
02-11-10-SC. The Petition miserably failed to attach the (1) the Sworn
Certification of Residency (with house location sketch) issued by the
barangay ; (2) sworn statement of counsel of record that he has
personally verified petitioner’s residency and that the petitioner had been
residing thereat for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of petition.
Paragraph d of the said Resolution provides that Failure of the Petitioner
to comply with the residency requirement shall be a ground for the
immediate dismissal of the petition. Hence, this instant case should be
DISMISSED.

6. Contrary to Petitioner’s baseless and reckless accusations, it

is the Petitioner who suddenly changed his taste. He became blunt and
insensitive to the Respondent especially so that he became a dollar
earner. He became an arrogant and selfish person. But that
circumstance did not stop the Respondent from loving and taking care of
the Petitioner. She was being martyr and very understanding to the

2
Petitioner even though the latter was so rude and ruthless to the
Respondent.

7. Noteworthy is the fact that the couple have been together

for a long time. They have been boyfriend and girlfriend for almost 7
years and was married for almost 20 years. The length of their
relationship would negate the assertion of the Petitioner that the
Respondent is psychologically incapacitated to fulfill her marital
obligations toward the Petitioner.

In addition thereto, the Respondent devoted her life as a good

mother to their only daughter, Ross Lynn E. Asingua who remained to
be in custody with the Respondent. It was the Respondent who took
care of their daughter and raised her the best way she could since birth
up to present. She raised her daughter and the latter is growing up
gracefully and doing great in school. Their daughter was even shocked
when she received a summon of this instant case as she was also
clueless as to why her father, the Petitioner herein, filed this instant case.
The Respondent and her daughter were the ones being victim in this
case.

8. On November 2015, as admitted by the Petitioner, he

purchased a car for the Respondent as a utility vehicle for their family.
Clearly then, the Petitioner appreciated and recognized the mother/ wife
duties of the Respondent being well done for rewarding her a car.

9. He likewise mentioned about his return on January 2016 or

two months from the time he purchased a car for the Respondent.
However, it is not true that on the said occasion or upon his arrival, the
Respondent showed no excitement thereof. The truth is, before his
arrival, he called the respondent and instructed the latter to go to the
airport to meet his colleague who was scheduled to off board their vessel
and who brought the presents for her and their kids. Believing in her
husband’s instruction, the Respondent went to the airport without any
make up and without any excitement because as she was told that she

3
is going to meet his colleague only. She was just surprised when she saw
her husband in the airport. She was surprised but at the same time she
was very happy to have seen her husband. Then, they went to a hotel
spent more intimate sweetness. Petitioner forced his wife to have sex
with him while the latter was hesitant considering that she had her period
at that time. However, just to please the Petitioner who just arrived from
abroad, she just gave in to the latter’s demand.There was no quarrel or
any unusual incident occurred at that time.

10. Respondent was just surprised that on October 2018, the

Petitioner unreasonably stopped his monthly allotment for the
Respondent. The Respondent was sad, so she tried confronting the
Petitioner however the latter deliberately and purposely ignored the
messages and calls of the Respondent. The Petitioner was so insensitive
and naive to the feeling of the Respondent.

11. Since October 2018 up to present, the Petitioner failed to

give financial, moral and emotional support to the Respondent. He only
gave financial support to their child but the same was too meager to
sustain the needs of their child. Their child even complained and begged
from the Petitioner to at least raise her monthly allowance but the said
request turned only to the Petitioner’s deaf ears.

12. It is sad to note that Petitioner has unjustly, unfairly and

unreasonably filed this present complaint against the Respondent by
merely alleging false baseless and unfounded narration of lies. This
Complaint was only made to cover up his shortcomings and wrongdoings
he committed against the Respondent.

13. Much as the Respondent would understand the Plaintiff who

is so selfish, nagger and a very insensitive person, but this instant
Petition is just too much to bear for the Respondent. The latter extended
her patience and even deferred to file a criminal case against the
Petitioner who publicly and shamelessly posted in his facebook account
that he is going to marry another woman again in the soonest time
because the Respondent still wanted to protect and still hoped for the

4
Petitioner to come back to them. The Respondent was so dismayed that
the Petitioner did not even confront the Respondent nor discuss with the
Respondent of what went wrong to their more than 20 years of marriage.

14. It is very improper and reckless of the Petitioner to file this

instant case without even confronting the Respondent. In just a span of
less then a year that the Petitioner cut off his monthly allotment and
even cut his communication with the Respondent, he hastily filed for
nullity of marriage unmindful of the feelings of the Respondent and their
daughter.

15. Rumor has it and even the Petitioner’s facebook posts would
suggest that he has already a new love. He was even bragging and
excited for their upcoming marriage after he is done with this instant
case for annulment. This fact clearly negates his baseless and malicious
accusations that it is the Respondent who has another man. The same
would like conclude his motive in filing this instant Petition at the expense
and aggravate the heartache of the Respondent.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most respectfully

prayed of this Honorable Court to DISMISS the instant Petition in view
of non compliance of the Rules regarding residency requirement and
DENY Petitioner’s Petition for being DEVOID OF ANY MERIT.

Further, Respondent most respectfully prays to this Honorable

Court to fix the Petitioner’s monthly support to their daughter, in the
amount of P 80,000, Philippine Currency, a month, for her to be able to
sustain her basic needs considering also that the Petitioner is gainfully
employed abroad earning more or less P500,000.00 a month.
Respondent further prays that the properties acquired by the parties
herein shall be transferred in the name of their only daughter to protect

5
the rights of the latter especially so when the plans of the Petitioner to
remarry another woman would prosper, in the broader interest of
substantial justice.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

Cebu City, for Bogo, Cebu, Philippines, July 17, 2019.

ATTY. BEVERLY F. ILUSTRISIMO-TUTOR

Counsel for the Respondent
Roll No. 56161
PTR No. 228991/ 12-6-2018 / Cebu Province
IBP No. ar 7017154 / 11-19-2018 / Cebu Province
Unit 1504, 15th Floor, Apple One Equicom Building.
Biliran Rd.,Mindanao Ave.,
Cebu Business Park,Cebu City
MCLE No. VI- 0003625, October 25, 2017
email: bevilustrisimo@yahoo.com

EXPLANATION

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have furnished a copy of this Answer to

his lawyer, by registered mail because of distance;

ATTY. YULANDO URSAL

Jugan, Consolacion, Cebu

ATTY. BEVERLY ILUSTRISIMO-TUTOR