Nathan Ray F.

Rudinas
IV-Arellano

Republic of the Philippines

Region 10
Municipal Trial Court
Iligan City
Branch ___

ABC Civil Case No.______

Plaintiff, For Ejectment

-versus-

XYZ
Defendant,
X-----------------------------X

DEFENDANTS POSITION PAPER

DEFENDANTS unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully submit this position Paper,
and state:

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

On June 28,2018 Plaintiff filed its complaint against the defendant for Ejectment from a
parcel of land located in Tubod, iligan City,the same docketed as Civil Case No. ____. Before
the filing of the said complaint the dispute was referred to the Lupong Tagamayapa ng Barangay
Tubod but the parties failed to arrive at an amicable settlement.

In its complaint plaintiff admitted that his residence is at Macapagal Avenue, Tubod,
Iligan City. On the other hand plaintiff admitted that the address of the defendant is also in
Macapagal Avenue, Tubod, Iligan City.

It was on August 24, 2018 wherein the defendant filed its answer with counterclaim for
damages. The Honorable Court directed both parties to file their respective position paper, hence,
their submission of this position paper.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

The Defendant has been in continuous possession of the property since 2013, where he
has established his business, a vulcanizing and battery charging shop, from the said year till 2016
the rent of the property was at Two thousand Five Hundred (₱2,500.00) pesos only, this was
suddenly increased by the Complainant to Five thousand (₱5,000.00) Pesos in 2016 exclusive of
electric and water bills. In consideration of the defendants investment in the said property he
continued to pay the rent in its new rate.

However, sometime in 2016, the defendant had knowledge that a certain JUAN is the
rightful owner of the property, that JUAN was the one paying the real property taxes and a
certificate of title was issue under his name, having confirmed the same, the defendant had
engaged in negotiations as to the renewal of the contract of lease with JUAN, and the payment of
the future rent to the true owner. A copy of the tax receipts and the Certificate of Title is hereto
attached as annex “A”.

The negotiation includes the advancements made by the plaintiff which was gratuitously
considered by JUAN and his family. However, since the property had already formed part of a
corporation owned by the JUAN family the execution of the contract of lease would have to
await a board meeting to be held this September 2018.
 Thus on the premise stated above, the defendant remains under lawful possession of the
property.

ISSUES

1. Whether or not the defendant is lawfully in possession of the property?

DISCUSSIONS

1. The Defendant is in lawful possession of the property

It is a basic rule in our laws, that one cannot sell, alienate or lease a property which he does not
lawfully own. In the present case, JUAN and his family were not only the ones paying taxes but
a certificate of title was issued to them as well, Thus, giving rise to the presumption that JUAN is
the lawful owner of the property in question and as such Art 428 of the civil code states that:

“ the owner has the right to enjoy and dispose of a thing without other limitations than
those established by law”

The agreement entered by the defendant and the rightful owner of the property JUAN is not
among those limited or prohibited by law, hence, there is no predicament which would prevent
JUAN from the enjoyment of his property by leasing the same to the defendant legally. Thus, the
defendant is in lawful possession of the property.

Even assuming arguendo that the plaintiff is a co-owner of the property his right as a co-owner
would not necessarily restrict or diminish the right of his co-owner JUAN to the enjoyment of
the property as Art 19 of the Civil Code states:

“Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act
with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith”

The plaintiff must first prove that the portion being occupied by the Defendant belongs to his
exclusive share in the co-ownership otherwise the property as a whole would be owned in
common as stated under Art. 485 of the Civil Code:

“the portions belonging to the co-owners in the co-ownership shall be presumed equal
unless the contrary is proved”

Being owned in common, the plaintiff could not restrict JUAN from the enjoyment of the same
and Art 486 of the same Code would govern to wit:

“Each co-owner may use the thing in common, provided he does so in accordance with the
purpose for which it is intended and in such a way as not to injure the interest of the co-
ownership or to prevent the other co-owners from using it according to their rights…”

Clearly, JUAN has the right to use the property and assuming that such right would interfere or
restrict the plaintiffs use of the property owned by them in common, such would not be a proper
subject for this ejectment case.

Finally, Since it has been established that the possession of the defendant of the subject property
is under an agreement or contract with the rightful owner or by one of the co-owners as assumed
above, the possession is lawful and the complaint should be dismissed for lack of cause of action.

2. Plaintiff is liable for damages to the defendant

The defendant since the filing of the malicious complaint by the plaintiff had been afraid, and
was no longer able to concentrate and properly perform his daily activities, defendant suffered
extreme anxiety, stress and sleepless nights, which when quantified is equivalent to Fifty
Thousand Pesos (₱50,000.00)
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully moved that this case be dismissed
and to render judgment in favor of the defendants directing plaintiff to pay defendants for
damages as sought for in their counterclaim.

Iligan City, ___________, 20_____

_____________________________
Counsel for Defedants
Iligan City, Philippines
P.T.R. No. ___________
I.B.P No. ____________
MCLE No. ___________
Roll No. _____________

VERIFICATION

I, XYZ, of legal age and Filipino, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law,
depose and state THAT:

I am one of the defendants in the above entitled case; I have caused the preparation of the
foregoing document and I have read the same and the contents of which are true and correct of
my own knowledge and/or on the basis of authentic documents.

AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

In witness whereof, I hereunto affix my signature this ________.

XYZ
Affiant

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

MANILA )SS.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ____ of ___________ year ______; affaint
exhibiting to me his valid Identification Card.

WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL

_________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

DOC. NO._______
PAGE NO._______
BOOK NO._______
SERIES OF 2019.