You are on page 1of 7

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT


THIRD JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 59
ANGELES CITY

PAULINA S. SILVESTRE,
Petitioner,
CIVIL CASE NO. R-ANG-18-0021-CV
-versus- For: Declaration for Nullity of a
Bigamous Marriage

LOGANITHAN KAILASAM,
Respondent.
x---------------------------------------------------------------------------x

SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND


PETITION BY PUBLICATION

WHEREAS, in the Order dated May, 22 2018, it was directed that


the summons and Petition be served upon respondent Loganathan
Kailasam by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the
Philippines once a weeks at the expense of the petitioner, pursuant
to Section 14, Rule 14 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure;

WHEREAS, the material allegations in the Petition dated


January 19, 2018 filed by the petitioner are reproduced as follows:

“THE PETITIONER, thorough counsel to this Honorable Court,


respectfully avers;

THE PARTIES
The petitioner Paulina S. Silvestre is of legal age, Filipino citizen
and with residence of Blk. 20, Lot 17, Apo Street, Phase 3, Pulu Amsic,
Angeles City as evidence by a notarized Certificate of Residency
marked as Annex “A” and her identification Card and Utility Bills
Receipts marked as Annexes “A-1”, “A-2”, “A-3”, “A-4”, and “A-5”,
herein referred to as the petitioner for brevity:

The respondent Loganathan Kailasam is likewise of legal age,


Malaysian and with last known address/residence at #379 L. Caudra
St., Sta. Quiteria, Caloocan City;

All notices, summons and orders of this Honorable Court


intended for the parties may be served at their respective addresses
above indicated;

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. On October 19, 1994, the petitioner and the respondent were


lawfully married at the Christ Centered Church, Tondo, Manila.
A photocopy of their Certificate of Marriage hereto attached
as Annex “B”. They were not blessed with a child;

2. That at the time the petitioner and the respondent got married,
the petitioner was still married to a certain Marlon Carino. They
were married on February 8, 1986 before Municipal Judge Hon.
Virgilio S. Lansang, Clarkfield, Pampanga as evidenced by their
Marriage Contract attached and marked as Annex “C”.

3. The petitioner entered into a subsequent marriage with the


respondent believing that her previous marriage with Marlon
Carino was not duly recorded with the Philippine Statistic
Authority;

4. The Certification from Philippines Statistic Authority indicating


the three (3) marriage entered into by the petitioner attached
and marked as Annex “D”;

5. Stunned as she was, petitioner then consulted a lawyer who


advised her to seek for a declaration of nullity of her second
marriage for being bigamous pursuant to Art. 35 of the Family
Code of the Philippines;
6. That during their marriage the parties have not acquired any
property, real or personal, nor they have any prenuptial
agreement. That despite absence of any property acquired
during their marriage, the property regime that governs their
marriage is absolute community under existing laws.

Hence, the instant petition.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully preyed of this


Honorable Court that after due notice and hearing, the instant
petition be GRANTED declaring the marriage between petitioner
PAULINA S. SILVESTRE and LOGANATHAN KAILASAM on October 19,
1994 as null and void for being bigamous.

Other relief and remedies just and equitable under the


premises are likewise prayed for.
Dau, Mabalacat City, Pamoanga for Angeles City, January 19,
2018.

For the Petitioner:


RAMISCAL-ATINAJA LAW OFFICE
IBP NO. 1086808/01—04-2018/ Pampanga
PTR NO. AC-1085636/01-05-2018/Angeles City
Roll of Attorneys No. 42171
MCLE Compliance No. V-0003995/October 1, 2014”(sic)

NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to Sec. 6 of A.M. no. 02-11-10-SC, the


Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Vid Marriage and
Annulment of Voidable Marriage, respondent Loganathan Kailasam
is hereby given thirty (30) days from the last publication of the
summons or from notice, within the same period, upon the petitioner.
The Summons and Petition shall be published once a week for two
(2) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the
Philippines, all at the expense of the petitioner.
WITNESS the Ho. MARIA ANGELICA T. PARAS-QUIAMBAO this
22nd day of May, 2018 at Angeles City, Philippines.

(SGD) ATTY. MISCHELLE


MAULION-JOCSON
Branch Clerk of Court

P.S. June 7 & 14, 2018

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
THIRD JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 59
ANGELES CITY

CIVIL CASE: R-ANG-18-00089-CV


For: Declaration of Nullity of Marriage

WENCESLAO G. DIZON, JR.,


Petitioner,
-versus-
ROSELLE P. VITALES-DIZON,
Respondent.
x----------------------------------------------------------------------------x

SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND


PETITION BY PUBLCATION

WHEREAS, in the Order dated May 21, 2018, it was directed that
the summons and Second Amended Petition be served upon
respondent Roselle P. Vitales-Dizon by publication in a newspaper of
general circulation in the Philippines once a week for two (2)
consecutive weeks at the expense of the petitioner, pursuant to Sec.
15, Rule 14 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure;
WHEREAS, the material allegations in the Second Amended
Petition dated March 19, 2018 filed by the petitioner are reproduced
as follows;
“COMES NOW, the petitioner through the undersigned counsel
and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully alleges that:

NATURE OF THE PETITION

The petition seeks the declaration of nullity of the existing


marriage between the petitioner and respondent due to absence of
essential requisites under Article 2 (par. 2) and formal requisites under
Article 3 (par. 1 in relation to Article 7 and pa. 3) of the Family Code;
and psychological incapacity of the both petitioner and respondent
to comply with the essential marital obligations;

PARTIES

1. Petitioner is of legal age, married and resident of No. 2 Rodeo


Drive, Marquee Place, Angeles City, while the defendant is also
of legal age, married and a resident Blk. 21 Lot 3, Bariles St.
Phase 1B, Kaunlaran Village, Navotas City, where she may be
served with summons and other processes of the court, a
Barangay Certification and Statement of Account of a
Telecom are hereto attached as Annexes “A” and “B” forming
an integral part hereof;
2. The petitioner came to meet the respondent in school in
college, who was his classmate. They became acquainted with
each other and eventually, close and dated to three (3) years
until they graduated and passed the nursing board
examination;
3. As fresh nurses, the parties worked together in NKTI in Quezon
City and In 2006, for proximity purposes since their schedule was
graveyard shift, respondent did sleep-overs at petitioner’s
place in Quezon City. As early that time, he late mother of the
petitioner noticed that respondent never bothered to help in
the household chores and upon arrival after work, respondent
heat straight to her room to sleep but his was just ignored by
the petitioner at that time;
4. In 2008, petitioner had a dinner with the respondent’s family at
a restaurant, when suddenly respondent’s father brought up
the topic of marriage and even gave his blessings to it that
came a shock and surprise to the petitioner since the invitation
was not for the said purpose;
5. The unexpected blessings of the respondent’s family for a
possible union or marriage of the herein parties even to their
apprehension came to the knowledge of their co-worker who
suggested just to get a “pastor-for-hire” to solemnize their
marriage of their own choice to place and date just to accede
to the whims of the respondent’s father;
6. Through the instigation of their co-worker a date and place
was arrange for the solemnization of their marriage despite
both were hesitant but just to appease the respondent’s father,
they went through it;
7. The pastor was engaged to solemnized the alleged marriage
on December 28, 2008 at Pansol, Laguna, bt in reality on the
staff came and had the parties affixed their signatures affixed
in a blank application form for Marriage;
8. Petitioner as well as the respondent knew that their marriage
was not valid as there being no solemnizing officer and their
personal declaration in the presence of a solemnizing officer
and their personal declaration in the presence of witnesses but
just the same;
9. A few months later thereafter, the parties herein received their
copy of their Certificate of Marriage from their co-worker
wherein it appeared that marriage was solemnized before Rev.
Sergio S. Pangan, a Minister of Catholic Evangelical Church of
the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ Inc. on January 22,
2009, at Room 202 of the Manila City Hall, when in truth and in
fact, no such marriage on said date, time, place occurred
before the said minister , a copy of the Certificate of Marriage
is hereto attached as Annex “D” forming an integral part
hereof.
10. The parties were blessed with a child by the name of
Wennel Jude V. Dizon, a copy of his Certificate of Live Birth is
hereto attached as Annex “D” forming an integral part hereof.
11. Soon petitioner was promoted as head of the Department
of Health’s Organ Donation Program and as a result thereof, he
was on-call 24/7 and had to travel to far-flung provinces to
response to deceased organ donors;
12. The respondent not happy of petitioner’s new assignment
and work