COMPLIANCE WITH THE BARANGAY

CONCILIATION PROCEEDING

3. The parties have undergone the mandatory

barangay conciliation proceedings pursuant to the
Local Government Code. Photocopy of the
Certificate to File Action dated 28 June 2016 is
hereto attached and marked as Annex “A” hereof.

ALLEGATIONS TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

4. Plaintiff is the registered owner of a parcel of

land covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No.
142-2016020733. The description of the land
covered by the said TCT is hereunder quoted:

XXX

A PARCEL LAND (LOT 6026-B-4, PSD-11-099673)

BEING A PORTION OF LOT 6026-B, PSD-11-092385,
SITUATED IN THE BARANGAY OF AUNDANAO,
ISLAND GARDEN CITY OF SAMAL,PROVINCE OF
DAVAO DEL NORTE, ISLAND OF MINDANAO.
BOUNDED AS FOLLOWS: ON THE NE., ALONG
LINES 1-2-3-4-5 BY LOT 6026-C, PSD-11-092385;
ON THE SE., ALONG LINE 5-6 BY DAVAO DULF;
ALONG LINE 6-7 BY LOT 6026-B-1; ALONG LINES 7-
8-9-10 BY LOT 6026-B-2 OF THE SIBDIVISION
PLAN; ON THE SW., ALONG LINE 11-12-13-14 BY
LOT 6026-B-3 OF THE SUBDIVISION PLAN, ALONG
LINES 14-15-16 BY LOT 6026-B-5 OF THE
SUBDIVISION PLAN. BEGINNING AT A POINT
MARKED “1” ON PLAN BEING N. 66 DEG 45’1.,
7188.11 M. FROM BLLM NO. 1., PLS-532-D.

T H E N C E………………………….
S. 74 DEG. 20’E., 200.32 M.TO POINT 2;
S. 74 DEG. 20’E., 245.29 M. TO POINT 3;
S. 74 DEG. 18’E., 12.53 M. TO POINT 4;
 S. 74 DEG. 20’E., 13.00 M. TO POINT 5;
S. 54 DEG. 07’W., 24.13 M. TO POINT 6;
N. 75 DEG. 09’W., 16.31 M. TO POINT 7;
N. 75 DEG. 09’W., 9.52 M. TO POINT 8;
N. 75 DEG. 09’W., 97.00 M. TO POINT 9;
S.14 DEG. 51’E M. TO POINT 10;
N. 75 DEG. 57’W., 33.84 M. TO POINT 11;
N. 12 DEG. 55’W., 23.17 M. TO POINT 12;
N. 75 DEG. 09’W., 32.19 M. TO POINT 13;
S. 07 DEG. 10’E., 22.63 M. TO POINT 14;
N. 75 DEG. 57’W., 22.63 M. TO POINT 15;
N. 75 DEG. 55’E., 51.42 M. TO POINT 16;

AND CONTAINING AN AREA OF SEVENTEEN

THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY NINE
(17,429) SQUARE METERS, MORE OR LESS.

XXX
4.1 Photocopies of the Transfer Certificate of Title
No. 142-2016020733 and Tax Declaration of the
said property are hereto attached and marked as
Annexes “B” to “B-1” hereof.

CAUSE OF ACTION

5. The above mentioned property was previously

owned by Romero M. Papacoy which was bought
by plaintiff by virtue of an Extra Judicial
Settlement of Estate with Deed of Absolute Sale
dated 13 August 2014. Hereto attached and
marked as Annexes “C” and “D” are copies of
Transfer Certificate of Title No. 235875 which was
already cancelled by virtue of said sale and a copy
of said Extra Judicial Settlement of Estate with
Deed of Absolute Sale, respectively, thereof;

6. When plaintiff was about to take possession

over the property, she hired a geodetic engineer
to verify that the property she bought from the
previous seller had the exact area considering she
is planning to build structures and improvements
thereto.

7. When it was surveyed by Geodetic Engineer

Cristian G. Garbin, Lot 6026-B-4, Psd 11-099673
(TCT No. 142-2016020733) there were
enchroachments made by defendant AUBREY
MARI MANGILET, particularly in the Existing
Boundary (Base from “PS” Monument with an
area of 137 square meters) and existing concrete
fence build by defendant which transgressed on
or about 124 square meters. Photocopy of the
Sketch Plan is hereto attached and marked as
Annexes “E” to “E-2” hereof.
13. Plaintiff have suffered sleepless nights,
physical suffering, mental anguish, moral shock,
social humiliation and besmirched reputation as
the proximate result of the defendant’s wrongful
act.

14. defendants must be ordered by this Honorable

Court to pay plaintiff FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P
50,000.00) on account of the defendant’s
violation of plaintiff’s right.

15. To set an example to others, defendants must

be ordered by this Honorable Court to pay
plaintiff the amount of Thirty Thousand Pesos
(30,000.00) by way of exemplary damages.

16. On account of defendants intransigence,

plaintiff was constrained to engaged the services
of counsel in the amount FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS
(P 50,000.00).

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is
respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that:

1. Ordering the defendants to destroy the

concrete fence and structures shown by the
Sketch Plan prepared by Geodetic Engineer
Cristian G. Garbin whereby she encroached a
total of two hundred sixty one (261) square
meters, more or less to the boundary of
plaintiff;
2. Ordering the defendants who are still
occupying the encroached property to vacate
the premises and restore plaintiff the
possession of the 261 square meter, more or
less a portion of their titled property registered
in her name;
 3. All of the improvements introduced by the
defendant be awarded to herein plaintiffs in
accordance with Article 449 of the Civil Code;
4. Defendants pay the following amounts to
plaintiff:

a. FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00), by

way of moral damages.
b. THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS (P30,000.00), by
exemplary damages.
c. FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00), by
way of attorney’s fees.

Plaintiff likewise prays for such other relief that the Honorable
Court deem just and equitable under the foregoing premises.

In the City of Davao, Philippines, March 28, 2017.

CUNANAN LAW OFFICE

Roxas Avenue corner
#381 P. Gomez Street, Davao City
Telefax No. (082) 224-4468
Tel. No. (082) 327-2696
Email Add: abclaw_27@yahoo.com

By:

ATTY. ALEX BLAISE J. CUNANAN

PTR No. 8175057B—12/21/16/Davao City
IBP No. 1056501—12/21/16/Davao City
Roll No. 51507
MCLE Compliance Certificate No. V-0007425
Dated /04-27-15, Pasig City
 VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE
OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, MILA THERESE Y. FRIEDRICH, of legal age, Filipino, married

and a resident of #1 Lunar St., Doña Vicenta, Davao City, Philippines,
after having been sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby
depose and state that:

1. I am plaintiff in the above-entitled case.

2. I have caused the preparation of the foregoing
Complaint.
3. I have read the contents thereof and all the
allegations therein contained are true and
correct to the best of my own personal
knowledge and authentic records.
4. I have not commenced any other proceeding
involving the same issues in the Supreme Court
or Court of Appeals, or in any division thereof,
or in any tribunal or agency, and that to the
best of my knowledge, no such action or
proceeding is pending before the Honorable
Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court, or in any
division thereof, or any tribunal or agency, and
that should I learn that a similar action has
been filed or is pending before the Honorable
Court of Appeals, Supreme Court, or in the
different divisions thereof, or in any tribunal pr
agency, I will undertake to notify this
Honorable Court within five (5) days from such
notice.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set

my hand this 29 MAR 2017, in Davao City,
Philippines.

MILA THERESE Y. FRIEDRICH

Affiant
 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 29 MAR 2017, in
the City of Davao, Philippines. Affiant exhibited to me her LTO No.
L02-15-007197 as competent proof of her identity.
 Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
11th Judicial Regoin
BRANCH 4
Panabo City, Davao del Norte

MILA THERESE Y. FRIEDRICH CIV CASE No. CC16-2017

Plaintiffs,
For: QUIETING OF TITLE,
-Vs- ETC.

AUBREYMARI MANGILET, ET AL.,

Defendants

ANSWER

DEFENDANTS, by counsel, to this Honorable Court, most respectfully state:

ADMISSIONS

1. DEFENDANTS ADMIT:
1.1 The personal circumstances of Plaintiff and Defendants, as stated in
pars. 1 & 2 of the Complaint.
1.2 The allegation in par. 3 of the Complaint, re prior referral to barangay
conciliation proceeding
1.3 The allegation in par. 5 of the Complaint, but only as to the fact “that
the above-mentioned property was previously owned by Romero M.
Papacoy”. The rest are denied for lack of personal knowledge on the
part of Defendants regarding the truth of falsity thereof.
1.4 The allegation in par. 9 of the Complaint, that “defendants have
introduced valuable improvements to the land;” however, that
regarding “bad faith” is denied, the truth being as elabprated in the
Affirmative Defenses:
1.5 The allegation in par. 12 of the Complaint, regarding receipt of that
“Demand Letter dated 17 August 2016.”

DENIALS
2. For lack of personal knowledge, on the part of answering defendant,
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity thereof, defendants deny
the following allegations in the complaint:
2.1 the allegations in pars. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 & 16 of the
Complaint.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
3. By way of affirmative defenses, Defendants further allege:
3.1 The EXTRA-JUDICIAL SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE WITH DEED OF ABSOLUTE
SALE, attached as Annex D to the Complaint, does not appear to be a
 complete document, as it is not duly notarized. Based on this
document, the supposed right of Plaintiff over subject property is
therefore not clear or unmistakable.
3.2 The SKETCH PLANS, attached as Annexes “E”, “E-1” & “E-2” to the
complaint are prepared by a partisan and partial witness, he having
been engaged and paid for by Plaintiff. Such Sketch Plans have yet to be
verified by an impartial, non-partisan geodetic engineer.
3.3 Granting for the sake of argument that Defendants have encroached on
some portion of Plaintiff’s property and on which they have introduced
valuable improvements, consisting of concrete fence, such occupation,
and construction of fence, are not done in bad faith, but in good faith.
3.4 Defendants acquired their properties in 2007 from its previous owner
Romero Papacoy and Norma Papacoy. [i] T-239054, copy attached as
Annex “1” hereof; [ii] T-239055, copy attached as Annex “2”; and [iii] T-
243137, copy attached as Annex “3”.
3.5 Guided by the vendor, Romero Papacoy, Defendants immediately
erected a perimeter fence around their newly-acquired property, for
the purpose of securing their property
 3.11 On the other hand, the pertinent portion of Art. 546 of the Civil Code
states:

ART. 546. Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but

only the possessor in good faith may retain the thing until he has been
reimbursed therefor. (underscoring supplied)

3.12 While Defendants concede that the options as stated in Art. 448 of the
Civil Code belong to Plaintiff, they are manifesting that they are willing to
pay the prevailing market value of the encroached area, granting there is
such encroachment

COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
4. For and as compulsory counterclaim, Defendants replead all of the
foregoing, and further allege:
4.1 In filling this precipitate and baseless suit. Plaintiff has compelled
Defendants to engage the services of counsel to concept of attorney’s
fee in the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00), which
amount should be reimbursed by Plaintiff.
4.2 This precipitate and baseless suit has caused serious mental anxiety,
wounded feelings, besmirched reputation and sleepless nights to
defendants, and for that they are asking for moral damages in the
amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00).
STATEMENT OF WILLINGNESS
TO ENTER INTO COMPROMISE
5. Defendants are open to compromise agreement, and they are willing to sit
down with Plaintiff, to explore ways and means to possibly settle this case
amicably, or at least abbreviate the proceedings hereof.
 PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this
Honorable Court to dismiss the instant complaint on the rounds as above-stated,
and thereafter, to award Defendants their compulsory counterclaims.

Tagum City, Davao Del Norte, July ____ 2017.