Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Judicial Region
Branch_______, Makati City

PARALUMAN S. SAJUELA
Represented by:
JUANITO SEGOVIA and RICO SEGOVIA

-vs.- Civil Case No.________

For: Recovery of Possession
(Accion Publiciana)

CORAZONE BODESTYNE,
EVANGELINE BRAVO
MARIA CANAYA, ELIZABETH AMENE
All other person occupying in their behalf
Or under their rights
x---------------------------------------------------------------------x

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

5. Plaintiffs are the surviving heirs of he late Regina Niebres Segovia who died on
,
in the City of as evidenced by her Death Certificate, a copy of which is hereto
attached as Annex “B”.

6. Her estate not having been settled up to this time, she remains to be registered owner of a
residential property measuring two-hundred sixty five (265) meters located at 3729 Bautista St.,
Palanan, Makati City covered by TCT NO. (13375) – S27924 (hereinafter referred to as
“Property”).

7. By virtue of a deed of sale over an undivided portion of the Property consisting of

hundred sixty five (165) square meters sometime in July 1950 purportedly between Regina
Niebres Segovia, as seller, and her sister, Maria Martinez Niebres, as buyer, the latter and her
family, including her daughters, defendants Corazon Bodestyme and Evangeline Bravo, took
over possession of said undivided portion.

8. However, under the Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 62, Makati City in a
case filed by Regina Niebres Segovia against her sister, Maria Martinez Segovia for Declaration
of Nullity of the aforementioned sale which became final and executory on May 8, 1998,said
court ruled as follows:

“WHEREFORE, a judgment is hereby rendered:

1. Declaring that the Deed of Absolute Sale, dated July3, 1950 (Exh. “A”), void ab
initio; and
2. Ordering the Registry of Deeds of Makati City to cancel the inscription of the
aforesaid Deed of Absolute Sale in the memorandum of encumbrances found at the
dorsal portion of Transfer Certificate of Title No. (13375) S-27924 (Exh. “B”).
 SO ORDERED.”

Copies of the Decision and Entry o Judgment are hereto attached as Annexes “C” and “C-1”,
respectively, and made integral part hereof.”

9. Thereafter, despite the annulment of the deed of sale covering said undivided portion,
Plaintiffs through mere tolerance, allowed the daughters and successors-in-interest of Maria
Martinez Niebres (who eventually died during the pendency of the case), namely: defendants
Corazon Bodestyme and Evangeline Bravo, to remain in the subject Property. Said Defendants
on the other hand, have allowed their co-Defendants Maria Canaya and Elizabeth Amene to
occupy the subject Property as their tenants.

10. On or about 2008, when the need of the Plaintiffs for the subject
property arose, Plaintiffs and, later on, through counsel, demanded from the Defendants verbally
and in writing, to peacefully vacate from the subject property. However, Defendants obstinately
refused to do so. The last of the demand letters sent to and received by the Defendants is dated
September 9, 2008, copies of which, with notation of receipt, are hereto attached and marked as
Annexes “D”, “E”, “F”, and “G”.

11. On September 18, 2008, Plaintiffs submitted the matter before the Barangay Council, but
the parties failed to amicably settle. A copy of the Certification to File Action issued relative
hereto attached and marked as Annex “H”.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Plaintiffs hereby incorporate the allegations under the first cause of action, and further state that:
12. The Plaintiffs have been deprived of the right to enjoy the benefits of being the lawful
owners of the subject property and should be awarded actual damages in the form of rentals in
the amount of , Philippine Currency from the time the Defendants unlawfully
occupied the subject property until the final disposition of this case.

THIRD CAUSEOF ACTION

Plaintiffs hereby incorporate the allegations under the first and second causes of action, nd
further state that:

(b) The Defendants pay actual damages to the Plaintiffs in the amount of P
as rentals from the time it unlawfully occupied the subject property belonging to
the Plaintiffs.
(c) The Defendants pay moral damages in the amount of P to the
Plaintiffs.
(d) The Defendants pay the amount of P as litigation expenses and
attorney’s fees.

Other reliefs as this Honorable Court may deem just and equitable.