Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Branch 123
City of Muntinlupa

SPOUSES HIRO
HIROSHIMA and DINA
HIROSHIMA
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL CASE NO. Q-2007-721
-versus-
For: Quieting of Title

XIAO XINGPIN,
Defendant.
x--------------------------------------------------x

PRE-TRIAL ORDER

When this case was called for pre-trial, Atty. Jundy N. Palana appeared for
the plaintiffs, and Atty. Charmaine Fhaye C. Casquejo appeared for the
defendant. The Plaintiffs Spouses Hiro and Dina Hiroshima and the defendant
Xiao Xingpin were also in court.

I. POSSIBILITY OF AMICABLE SETTLEMENT

During the pre-trial, there was an agreement between the parties as to the
possibility of amicable settlement of the case.

II. STIPULATIONS AND ADMISSION OF THE PARTIES

The plaintiffs, through their counsel and the defendant, through her
counsel stipulated on the following that:

1. That the parties have the capacity to sue and be sued;

2. That the plaintiffs owned the property in question;

3. That the parties admitted that there was a Deed of Sale in favor the
Defendant; and,
 4. That the said deed was duly notarized.

III. ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED

1. Whether a cloud exist on the alleged property of the Plaintiffs;

2. Whether the Complaint shall be dismissed based on non-compliance

with Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping;

3. Whether the Plaintiffs have legal basis of ownership and possession of

the property they are claiming;

4. Assuming that the Complaint shall not be dismissed, whether the

Defendant has better right of ownership to the property and should be
declared its real owner;

5. Whether the parties are entitled to their respective claims of damages

IV. EVIDENCE FOR THE PARTIES

a. Testimonial Evidence

The plaintiffs will present the following witnesses:

1. Hiro Hiroshima - To attest to genuineness and truthfulness of

the allegations in the Complaint.

2. Dina Hiroshima - To attest to genuineness and truthfulness of

the allegations in the Complaint.

The defendant will present the following witnesses:

1. Xiao Xingpin - To controvert the allegations against her in the

Complaint filed by the Plaintiffs.

2. Carlos Reyes - To state that the allegation made by the Plaintiffs

regarding the affidavit/statement allegedly executed by him
against the defendant, stating that he (Reyes) knew and informed
 the Plaintiffs about the transfer of property to the Defendant, are
erroneous and in truth and in fact was without his knowledge.

3. Notary Public – Atty. Jesus C. Velasco - To prove that the

parties appeared before him when they presented the Deed of
Sale to have it notarized; and, to prove that the Defendant
presented not only the Community Tax Certificate but also her
Government I.D. specifically her Voter’s I.D. No. 2293819982.

b. Documentary Evidence
The plaintiffs marked the following exhibits:

1. Exhibit A – Free Patent Certificate No. 78910 - To prove that

the Plaintiffs had paid all real estate taxes for ten (10) years and
had acquired the property based on the free patent.

2. Exhibit B – Tax Declaration No. 01-23456-789 - To prove that

the Plaintiffs bought the rights to the said property.

3. Exhibit C – Contract of Lease between Plaintiffs and Defendant

dated February 14, 2017 - To prove that the parties executed a
contract of lease and had a lessor-lessee relationship, contrary to
the claim of the Defendant that the property was sold to her.

The defendants marked the following exhibits:

1. Exhibit 1 – Transfer Certificate of Title No. 89976 - To prove

that the property in question was validly transferred from the
Plaintiffs to the Defendant;

2. Exhibit 2 – Deed of Sale executed by Plaintiffs in favor of the

Defendant dated February 14, 2017 - To prove that there was
indeed a contract of sale between the parties and not a contract
of lease;

3. Exhibit 3 – Photocopy of six (6) postdated checks issued by the

Defendant in favor of the Plaintiffs. - To prove that the Defendant
 successfully completed her payment of the property to the
Plaintiffs;

4. Exhibit 4 – Affidavit of Mr. Carlos Reyes. - To prove that the

allegations of the Plaintiffs against the Defendant are false and
that the affidavit signed by him through the initiative of the
Plaintiffs were initially a blank paper and the contents of which
was without his knowledge nor consent.

V. HEARING DATE
For the Plaintiffs:

September 20, 2018, October 4, 2018 and October 18, 2018 all at 2
o’clock in the afternoon.

For the Defendant:

November 8, 2018, November 15, 2018 and December 6, 2018 all at

2 o’clock in the afternoon.

The parties are hereby directed to go over the Pre-Trial Order and submit
their comments, corrections or proposals for inclusion in the Pre-trial Order
within ten (10) days from receipt of the same. Thereafter, the said Order shall
become final and shall govern the entire proceedings and shall not be amended
or modified, except when it is intended to prevent miscarriage of justice or when
strict adherence to technicality will result to the denial of due process to either
party.

The Pre-trial Conference is hereby ordered closed and terminated. Let the
parties sign the minutes of the proceedings as well as the Pre-trial Order.

Set this case for initial trial on September 20, 2018 at 2 o’clock in the
afternoon.

The plaintiffs, the defendant, and their counsels are notified in open Court.
 SO ORDERED.

Dictated in open Court this 30th day of August at Muntinlupa City,

Philippines.

“Hon. X”
Judge
Copy furnished:

Counsels for the Plaintiffs:

Jundy N. Palana

Ralph Eric Nolasco

Edgar Tamayo

Kristen Gel Gohar

Jun Cyril Ambona

Penthouse, Mendoza Building,108 Paseo De Roxas, Makati City

Counsels for the Defendant:

Charmaine Fhaye C. Casquejo

Rio Tiaro A. Dulay

Gershwin D. Evangelista

Rodolfo D. Morata

Mark Anthony J. Tiongson

15th floor, Empire Building, Muntinlupa City