Republic of the Philippines

NATIONAL JUDICIAL CAPITAL REGION

Regional Trial Court
Manila, Branch 123

ANDRES BONIFACIO,
Plaintiff,

-versus- Civil Case No. 12345

For: Recovery of Possession
(Accion Publiciana)

ANTONIO LUNA,
Defendant.
x ------------------------------ x

ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

COMES NOW the Defendant Antonio Luna, represented by the undersigned

counsel, to this Honorable Court, respectfully states that:

1. Summons was received on February 14, 2018;

2. The allegations in paragraph 1 of the Complaint for Accion

Publiciana as to the personal circumstances of the Plaintiff Andres
Bonofacio are ADMITTED;

3. The allegations in paragraph 2 of the Complaint are ADMITTED;

4. The allegations in paragraph 3, as regards the ownership of the Plaintiff on

the subject parcel of land situated in 143 AAA St., Quezon City are
DENIED for want of genuineness and authenticity. The alleged TCT is
on its face tainted with irregularity. Upon official request from the
Registry of Deeds of the Quezon City, the alleged lot area is only 500
square meters and not 1,000 square meters as alleged by the plaintiff.
A certification from the said government agency is made as an
integral part of this answer. A copy of said certificate issued by the
Register of Dees is hereby attached as “Annex A”.
5. The allegations in paragraph 4 are ADMITTED;

6. The allegation in paragraph 5 of the complaint DENIED. On August

20, 2017, the Plaintiff was not even the lawful owner of the subject
property since the deed of sale of the subject lot was only executed on October
1, 2017. Therefore, Plaintiff began his title to the property only on October 1,
2017. He was not the owner and not a lawful possessor of the subject
property on August 20, 2017. Thus, he was not deprived his right of
possession as there was NO right to speak of at that time. A copy of the
Deed of Absolute Sale is hereby attached as “Annex B”.

7. The allegations in paragraph 6 and 7 of the complaint are DENIED.

The Defendant received neither notice nor demand as he was out of
the country for a heart bypass surgery in Virginia, USA from January
01, 2017 – January 10, 2018. Attached as “Annex C” is the
certification from the Virginia Methodist Hospital as well as the
Philippine Bureau of Immigration certifying that the defendant was
not in the country when the alleged demands were made;

8. The allegations in paragraph 8 of the complaint are DENIED. It was

impossible for the defendant to attend such barangay conciliation as
he was recuperating from his heart surgery in the United States
during the alleged conciliation meeting as certified by his hospital
records and travel records. A copy of the medical records are hereby
attached as “Annex D”;

9. The allegations in paragraph 8 of the complaint are DENIED. There

was no act of dispossession since in the eyes of the law, the Plaintiff’s
ownership only commenced from the date the deed of sale over the
subject lot was perfected, the reckoning period of which is on October
1, 2017 and not prior to it;

SPECIAL AND/OR AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Defendant hereby pleads all the foregoing allegations and, by way of

special and affirmative defenses states that:
10. The Plaintiff in his complaint improperly laid the venue for
accion publiciana;

11. Accion publiciana is an ordinary civil action the purpose of which is

recovery of the right of possession which is called possession de jure,
a real right. Under Section 1, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, venue of
real actions provides:

Section 1. Venue of real action. — Actions affecting title to

or possession of real property, or interest therein, shall be
commenced and tried in the proper court which
has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real
property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.

12. The alleged subject matter of the controversy is a portion of a parcel

of land located in Quezon City. However, herein complaint was filed
by the Plaintiff in Manila City. Accion publiciana being a real action
should have been filed in the court having jurisdiction over the place
where the real property involved, or a portion thereof is situated,
which in this case is in Quezon City;

13. Therefore, the instant complaint should be dismissed for improper

venue. Section 1 in connection with Section 6, Rule 16 of the Rules of
Court thus provides:

Section 1. Grounds. — Within the time for but before filing

the answer to the complaint or pleading asserting claim, a
motion to dismiss may be made on any of the following
grounds:

xxx

© That venue is improperly laid;

xxx

Section 6. Pleading grounds as affirmative defenses. — If no

motion to dismiss has been filed, any of the grounds for
 dismissal provided for in this Rule may be pleaded as an
affirmative defense in the answer and, in the discretion of the
court, a preliminary hearing may be had thereon as if motion
to dismiss has been filed.

14. By way of counterclaim, defendant alleges that:

a. By virtue of this unwarranted suit initiated by the Plaintiff,

Defendant was forced to hire the services of a lawyer in the
sum of FORTY THOUSAND PESOS (P 40,000.00);

b. By reason of Plaintiff’s unwarranted suit, Defendant suffered

mental anguish, wounded feelings, sleepless nights, serious
anxieties, and other similar sufferings for which defendant
claims moral damages of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P
50,000.00).

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is respectfully

prayed that this Honorable Court render judgment in favor of
Defendant by:

a. Ordering the Plaintiff to pay the cost of suit, attorney’s fees

amounting to FORTY THOUSAND PESOS (P 40,000.00)
and other legal fees incurred by the Defendant;

b. Ordering the Plaintiff to pay FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P

50,000.00) for moral damages sustained by the Defendant;

c. Dismissing the instant case against the Defendant for

improper venue; and

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

17 February 2018, City of Manila.

 (signed)

ATTY. ELPIDIO QUIRINO

Counsel for the Defendant
Unit 4567, The Grand Condominium,
Panay Ave., Quezon City
IBP No. 654321; 05/25/17
PTR No. 123456; 02/03/14
Roll No. 78910
MCLE Compliance No. IV – 001122; 09/17/16
Contact No. 09268747420
E-mail: elpidioquirinobayani@gmail.com

VERIFICATION AND
CERTIFICATION AGAINST NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, Antonio Luna, of legal age, single, Filipino, and a resident of 123

XYZ St., Quezon City, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law,
hereby depose and state that:

1. I am the defendant in the above-entitled case;

2. I have caused the preparation of this answer;

3. I have read it and its contents are true and correct of my personal
knowledge and/or based on authentic records;

4. I hereby certify that I have not heretofore commenced any other

action or proceeding involving the same issues in any court, tribunal,
 or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of my knowledge, no such
action or proceeding is pending therein;

5. If I should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim

has been filed or is pending, I undertake to report such fact within
five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Court.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 17th day

of February 2018 in Manila City.
(signed)
Antonio Luna
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 17th day of

February 2018 in Manila City, affiant exhibiting to me his Driver’s License
with No. LO3-123451 issued by the Land Transportation Office on May
2014, as competent proof of her identity.

(signed)
ATTY. MANNUEL L. QUEZON
Notary Public
Valid until December 31, 2018
Roll No. 78910
IBP No. 654321/05-25-17/Manila
PTR No. 07117/05-8-17/Manila
MCLE Compliance No. IV – 001122;
09/17/16

Doc. No. 17
Page No. 4
Book No. 3
Series of 2018