REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT

X x x CITY

BRANCH x x x

X x x,

Plaintiff

Civil Case No. xxx

- Versus

Unlawful Detainer

Xx x, etc.,

Defendants.

x---------------------------------x

ANSW ER

(In re: Summons, Received on

xxx 2011)

The DEFENDANT xxx, by counsel, respectfully states:

I. ANSWER

1. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Complaint are admitted.

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.

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

4. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint is denied for lack of knowledge and information sufficient to form a
belief as to the veracity 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 being those alleged in the special and
affirmative defenses part hereinbelow.

II. SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

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).

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

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

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.

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.
9. Since 1975 up to the present time, the xxx Family has been in possession of the subject property by
reason of the said 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 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 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 herein defendant, a copy of which is marked as Annex 3 hereof.

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 discuss a serious extrajudicial compromise, without
admission of guilt on the part of the defendant. It was not formally answered by the plaintiff.

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 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

13.By reason of the abuse of right committed by the plaintiff and by reason of the instant precipitate
and unfounded suit, the 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.

IV. PRAYER

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 moral damages of P100,000.00, plus
costs of suit.

The defendant respectfully prays for such and other reliefs as may be deemed just and equitable in the
premises.

xxx City, xxx 2011.

LASERNA CUEVA-MERCADER LAW OFFICES

Counsel for Defendant xxx

Unit 15, Star Arcade, C.V Starr Avenue

Philamlife Village, Las Pinas City 1740

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.

Xxx

VERIFICATION

AND

ANTI-FORUM SHOPPINFG CERTIFICATION

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 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.
 xxx City, xxx 2011.

Xxx

Affiant/Defendant

SSS Member ID No.

xxx

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.

NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No. ____

Page No. ____

Book No. ____

Series of 2011

Cc :

Atty. Xxx

Counsel for Plaintiff

xxx Rm. xxx

xxx Bldg.
Brgy. xxx, xxx City

Metro Manila

Reg. Rec. No.

Date PO

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.

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.