REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

11TH JUDICIALREGION
City of Davao
Branch ___

NALI LITO,
Plaintiff,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 12345

INA AGAWAN,
Defendant.
x--------------------------------------------x

ANSWER
(With COUNTERCLAIM)

DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully states that:

ADMISSIONS/DENIALS

1. She admits the contents of paragraph 1 only insofar as her personal

circumstances;

2. She admits the contents of paragraph 2 only insofar as it alleges that she
claims ownership of the black diamond necklace but specifically deny the rest of
the allegations. The truth being that Defendant knew from the time that he found
the black diamond necklace on June 1, 2007, that it belonged to the defendant;

2.1. Defendant Ina Agawan, demanded the return of the black diamond
necklace upon knowledge that plaintiff is in possession thereof. In fact, Defendant
sent written and verbal notice to plaintiff to return the black diamond necklace to
her. There is no truth to plaintiff’s allegation that he was in possession of watch
(sic) on June 5, 1999 because said jewelry was lost only in 2007;

2.2. Sometime in 2016, Defendant found out that the jewelry subject matter
of this action was in possession of Plaintiff. Immediately thereafter, defendant sent
verbal and written demands and attached a copy of the receipt as a proof of
ownership thereof. Unfortunately, Plaintiff, without any legal ground, refused to
return the same to the defendant. A copy of the demand letter is here to attach as
“Annex 1”;

3. He admits the contents of paragraph 3 only insofar as plaintiff alleges that

he has no legal right over the black diamond necklace but specifically denies that
the rest of the allegations;

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
 4. The Defendant is the real owner of the black diamond necklace. She
bought it from Jewelmer on October 30, 2006, as shown by the receipt/certificate
which is hereto attached as “Annex 2”;

5. That the black diamond necklace has been in possession and control of
Defendant Ina Agawan from date of purchase until May 30, 2007 when she failed
to notice that her bag which contained the diamond necklace was missing from her
personal belongings.

6. That Defendant exerted earnest effort to look for the diamond necklace.
However, her efforts proved futile.

COUNTERCLAIM

8. Defendant reiterates, repleads and incorporates by reference all the

foregoing insofar as they are material and by way of counterclaim, Defendant
alleges that:

8.1. Defendant sent a written demand to the plaintiff by attaching the

receipt as proof of ownership. Thus, notwithstanding plaintiff’s knowledge that the
Defendant is the legal owner of the necklace, he refused without legal ground to
return the same to the Defendant.

8.2. As a result thereof, Defendant suffered sleepless nights, anxiety and wounded
feelings for which plaintiff should be compelled to pay P20,000.00 as moral
damages.

8.3. To deter the general public from similarly doing plaintiff’s unlawful act,
plaintiff should be held to pay P20,000.00 as exemplary damages.

8.4 By reason of Plaintiff’s refusal to return the diamond necklace, without valid
cause, the Defendant was compelled to litigate and engage the services of a
counsel at an agreed fee of P20,000.00.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, Defendant, INA AGAWAN respectfully prays that judgment be

rendered in her favor by ordering the Plaintiff:
(1) to immediately return the black diamond necklace to herein Defendant;
(2) to pay herein defendant the sum of P20,000 as moral damages;
(3) to pay herein Defendant P20,000 as attorney’s fees and
(4) to pay herein Defendant P20,000.00 as exemplary damages.

Other reliefs, just and equitable in the premises, are likewise prayed for.

Quezon City; 9 February 2018

(Sgd.) Atty. PETMALU LODI

 Counsel for Defendant
Unit 319 San Rafael Condominium
San Rafael corner San Ignacio Streets
1550 Davao City, Philippines
P.T.R. No. 8439481 * Davao City * January 11, 2015
I.B.P No. 882584 * Davao City * January 10, 2016
MCLE No. III 14549 * Davao City * April 26, 2017
Roll No. 47673

Copy furnished through personal service:

ATTY. FRETTI LAUREL
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Unit 1234 Laurel Building
Sampaloc, Davao City

EXPLANATION

Copy of the foregoing ANSWER was served to plaintiff’s counsel by

registered mail due to time and distance constraints and for lack of the
undersigned’s staff who can serve the same in person.

Atty. PETMALU LODI

VERIFICATION & CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

I, INA AGAWAN, of legal age, do hereby state that: I am the defendant in the case
filed by NALI LITO for Complain-in-intervention; in response, I have caused the
preparation of this Answer with Counterclaim; I have read its contents and affirm
that they are true and correct to the best of my own personal knowledge; I
specifically deny the genuineness and due execution as well as the binding effect
of the actionable documents pleaded by plaintiff; I hereby certify that there is no
other case commenced or pending before any court involving the same parties and
the same issue and that, should I learn of such a case, I shall notify the court
within five (5) days from my notice.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument on 9 February 2018.

(Sgd.)
INA AGAWAN
 SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me, this 9th day of February 2018,
in the City of Davao by ANDRES BONIFACIO with Passport No. 30111863
issued on 10th of May 2016 at Department of Foreign Affairs –Davao.

ATTY. EDUARDO M. SANTOSA

NOTARY PUBLIC
Commision expires Dec 31, 2018
PTR #5332745/01-15-17/Davao.
IBP Lifetime Member Roll #015425
Attorney’s Roll #37974

Doc. No. ___;

Page No. ___;
Book No. ___;
Series of 2018.