Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES

First Judicial Region
Branch ___
Baguio City

MARIA THERESA GACETA, CIVIL CASE NO. _______

Plaintiff,
FOR:
-versus-
FORCIBLE ENTRY
Certain DPWH-CAR Employees.
Defendants.
x----------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff by counsel and unto the Honorable Court, most

respectfully states:

1. Plaintiff is of legal age, single, and a resident of No. 05 Cabaritan

Norte, Naguilian, La Union, who for purposes of this action may be
served with pleadings and notices through undersigned counsel;

2. Defendants _____________ are of legal ages, Filipinos, and a

residents of ___________, Engineers Hill, Baguio City, where they
may be served with summons and other processes;

3. The plaintiff is the registered owner of the parcel of land embraced in

TCT No. 018-2010002001 (hereinafter referred to as the subject
property), the specifics of plaintiffs acqusition of the property are
hereinafter stated; a copy of the title is attached as Annex A;

4. Plaintiffs father, the late Benjamin F. Gaceta, Sr. (Benjamin for

brevity), is a retired employee of Department of Public Works and
Highways Regional Office, Cordillera Administrative Region
(hereinafter referred to as DPWH-CAR). During his tenure, he was
billeted in one of the cottages/barracks at the then DPWH Benguet
Engineering District Equipment Motorppol Compound (DPWH
BEDEMC for brevity), Engineers Hill, Baguio City;

4.1. When the office of DPWH Benguet Engineering District (DPWH-

BEDO for brevity) was transferred to Wangal, La Trinidad, Benguet,
the DPWHBEDEMC no longer served its purpose as staging area of
the agencys equipments, because said equipments were already
stored within the premises of DPWH-BEDO Wangal Office;
4.2. Because of the transfer of DPWH-BEDO and its equipments, the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources-Cordillera
Administrative Office (DENR-CAR for brevity), repossessed the
whole compound of the previous office of DPWH-BEDO in Engineers
Hill, including the improvements made thereon;

4.3. The foregoing compound, embraced in Approved Subdivision Plan

SWO-1-01039, was declared alienable and disposable. As such the
DENR-CAR opened the area, including the improvements made
thereon, for bidding to qualified applicants; photocopy of the
approved subdivision plan is hereto attached as Annex B;

4.4. Benjamin, qualified and being the long occupant of Lot 57 of the
aforesaid subdivision plan, submitted his bid to purchase the said
properties;

4.5. The purchase of the foregoing properties was awarded by DENR-CAR

to Benjamin, and the award papers were processed in favor of him
after the remittance of the bid price. Corresponding tax declarations
were issued Tax Declaration Number ARP-9607036-27353/ARP-
0107036-27353 (old tax declarations), and ARP 2012-07-036-122292
(new tax declaration), photocopies of the same are hereto attached as
Annexes C, D, and E;

4.6. Due to the death of Benjamin pending the documentation of the

public sale, the DENR-CAR executed a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor
of the his heirs, and thereafter issued in the name of the HEIRS OF
BENJAMIN GACETA, SR. (Heirs for brevity), per Original Certificate
of Title NumberP-3980, and embraced by Tax Declaration No. 2010-
07-036-106824. Certified photocopies of the foregoing OCT and Tax
Declaration are repectively attached hereto as Annexes F and
G. A photocopy of the Deed of Absolute Sale and the proclamation
giving powers to DENR to dispose government properties are
respectively attached hereto as Annexes H and I;

4.7. The Hiers decided to convey the property in the name of Plaintiff.
Thus, OCT No. P-3980 was cancelled, and TCT No 018-2010002001
was issued in the name of herein plaintiff;

5. A (Partial) Demolition Order No. 14, Series of 2012 was issued against
the subject property. A photocopy of the aforesaid Demolition Order
is hereto attached as Annex J;

5.1. The Heirs wanted to demolish the entire structure due to its state.
The Heirs the implementing agency, the City Building and Architects
Office/City Building Officials of Baguio, to cancel the partial
demolition on the condition the Heirs will apply for voluntary
 demolition of the entire structure. A copy of the written
communication to this effect is hereto attached as Annex K;

5.2. Upon the Heirs application for voluntary demolition, Demolition

Permit No. 20-15-000-111 was approved and issued on May 6, 2016.
A copy of which is hereto attached as Annex L;

6. On April 8 2016 (note:bakit po april?eh ung permit was approved

only on May), after giving ample time to the occupants to vacate the
premises, and after complying with the conditions set forth in the
Demolition Permit, the Heirs prepared to implement the demolition
by putting first temporary fence just to enclose the premises for
security purposes;

6.1. During the fencing of the area, armed civilian guards and male
employees of the DPWH-CAR arrived. Armed with guns and without
any proof of ownership to present, the group ordered the Heirs and
the workers to stop the activities. The Heirs went to the police station
to seek visibility in the area and for the maintainance of peace and
order, because the group have threatened and intimidated the Heirs
and the workers. Unfortunately, when the Heirs came back with the
police, the workers already stopped the fencing because they were
threatened to be harmed if they still continue. It was very difficult for
Heirs to look for another set of workers to do the fencing because of
such threats and intimidation;

6.2. The Heirs repeatedly went to the office of DPWH-CAR, presented a

certification from the DENR-CAR that the land particularly Lot No.
57 under the SWO-01-01039 was araded in favor of their father,
Benjamin Gaceta Sr., but all the efforts remained futile because
DPWH-CAR insisted that it owns the property, and that the proof of
ownership which the Heirs presented are mere papers. A photocopy
of the DENR Certification is hereto attached as Annex M;

7. The Heirs rescheduled to implement the demolition supposedly on 27

April 2016 but because of the continued harassment of the DPWH
Staff and civilian guards, the Heirs were not able to implement the
rescheduled demolition on said date;

8. In the evening of 28 May 2016 (a Saturday), a fire incident occurred

in the area, destroying more or less thirty (30) residential houses
including those houses occupied by DPWH staff and civilian guards
were destroyed;

8.1. Since it was a Saturday when the fire incident occurred, being a
weekend, the Heirs left their house for La Union. When the Heirs
learned of the fire incident the following day, the Heirs immediately
went back at Baguio to check their house;
8.2. Upon arrival in their house, the Heirs were surprised that the
premises were already occupied by the DPWH staff and their families
(intruder-occupants for brevity), and that the house was opened by
the DPWH-CAR Admin. Staff/Personnel;

8.3. The Heirs sought the assistance of the Barangay Officials of Engineers
Hill but to no avail because the Punong Barangay was so reluctant to
talk to the intruder-occupants;

9. In the morning of 31 May 2016, herein plaintiffs brother and their

cousin Atty. Denis Lomboy, went to the house and talked to the
intruder-occupants. During the conversation, and despite the
COMELEC gun ban, one of the intruder-occupants pulled-out his
gun, cocked the trigger, and aimed at Atty. Lomboy, forcing the duo
to leave the premises and seek police assistance. A copy of the police
certificate of blotter is hereto attached as Annex N;

10. A few days after the foregoing incident, the Punong Barangay
and CIDG-CAR assisted the Heirs in taking out some important
documents stock inside the house being illegally occupied by the
intruder-occupants. Since then, the Heirs never stepped in the
premises for fear of their lives because the intruder-occupants are
armed with guns;

11. Due to the failure and refusal of the defendants to surrender and
restore possession of the subject property, the plaintiffs were
compelled to file this complaint and engage the services of the
undersigned counsel to be able to protect their rights and interest
over their property and for whose services the plaintiffs agreed to pay
the amount of PHP___________ as attorneys fees and expect to
incur litigation expenses in the approximate amount of
PhP_____________, for which amounts defendants should be held
liable;

12.To cushion the prejudice being sufferred by the plaintiffs, the

defendants must be individually held liable to pay the amount of PHP
__________ a month from their intrusion until they have actually
vacated and surrendered possession of the subject property to the
plaintiffs by way of reasonable compensation for their continued use
and possession.

PRAYER
 Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable
Court that, after a judicious consideration, that:

1. It order the defendants to vacate the subject property and turnover

possession of the entire premises to the plaintiff;

2. It order the defendants to pay the plaintiff PhP__________ each by

way of reasonable compensation for their continued use and
occupation of the subject property from the date of last demand until
whole possession is restored to the plaintiffs;

3. It order the defendants to pay attorneys fees and expenses of

litigation in the aggregate amount of PhP __________.

A general relief is likewise prayed for.

Baguio City, this ___ day of February 2017.