Republic of the Philippines MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES Fifth Judicial Region Legazpi, City

PEDRO BATONGBAKAL, Plaintiffs, - versus JUAN BATO, Defendant, x---------------------------------x CIVIL CASE NO. 10287622 For: Damages

ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

DEFENDANT, JUAN BATO, to the Honorable Court by way of answer to the complaint respectfully avers:

ADMISSIONS / DENIALS

1.

Paragraph 1 of the complaint is ADMITTED by answering DEFENDANT. However his present address is at Washington Drive Legazpi City.

2. Paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of the complaint is also admitted specifically.

BATONGBAKAL VS. BATO CIVIL CASE NO. 10287622 ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

page 2of 6

3. Paragraph 5 of the complaint is partly admitted only insofar as the plaintiff was at full stop, and the Nissan Sentra owned by answering defendant, collided with the rear bumper of the plaintiffs vehicle.

4. Paragraph 6 of the complaint is partly admitted only insofar as the driver of the Nissan Sentra is the answering defendant.

5. Paragraphs 7 to 11 are specifically denied for lack of sufficient knowledge as to the truth or veracity of the foregoing, the truth being that stated in the SPECIAL / AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES:

By way of SPECIAL / AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, answering defendant, repleads and reiterates in paragraphs 1 to 5 and avers:

6.

Answering defendant hereby claims that the traffic light was changed from red to green for two minutes, but plaintiffs vehicle did not move from its stationary state;

7. That answering defendant started honking the car horn 20 meters before the collision site, but despite such warning, plaintiff never moved from his stationary site;

BATONGBAKAL VS. BATO CIVIL CASE NO. 10287622 ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

page 3 of 6

8.

That due to heavy rainfall and oil spills from various vehicles that passed before the collision happened, the tires of the Nissan Sentra, slipped despite the breaks for a distance of 1.75 meters, causing the minor collision of the vehicles involved herein;

9. Answering defendant, confronted plaintiff, regarding the traffic light regulations, plaintiff excusing himself due to his new pair of contact lenses and the adjustment he is into using them;

10.

Answering defendant hereby avers that it is he who confronted the plaintiff and not the other way around;

11.

Answering defendant did not promise anything to the plaintiff, and did not received any demands from him;

12.

Answering defendant hereby avers that actual expenses of the Honda Civic vehicle owned by plaintiff amounts only to Php 10,000.00, since it was only a minor dent and few paint scratches;

13. All Allegations of the answering defendant is evidenced by a police report signed by plaintiff admitting the fault of the incident;

BATONGBAKAL VS. BATO CIVIL CASE NO. 10287622 ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

page 4 of 6

14.

With all due respect due the Honorable Court, it has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint;

15.

The proper filing fees have not been paid by PLAINTIFF, as enjoined the pertinent provisions of Rule 141, because applying the totality rule, the total amount of the claim is Php 95,000.00 consisting the alleged value of the actual damage and cost of suit. By reason of non compliance of the provisions in payment of docket fees, the Honorable Court has been effectively ousted from jurisdiction to hear and decide the instant case.

By way of COMPULSARY COUNTERCLAIM, answering defendant alleges: 16. The allegations in paragraph 1 to 15 are hereby repleaded reproduced and reiterated;
17.

The instant suit against answering DEFENDANT is malicious and groundless, PLAINTIFFS precipitate action has caused himto suffer mental anguish, serious anxiety, embarrassment, and humiliation, including besmirched reputation for which he should be entitled to a

grant of moral damages, although the amount is not capable of pecuniary estimation, should not be less than Php 50,000.00;

BATONGBAKAL VS. BATO CIVIL CASE NO. 10287622 ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

page 5 of 6

18. PLAINTIFFS reckless and wanton attitude in filing the present action against answering DEFENDANT should be castigated to deter other persons from acting in the same manner, and entitle the latter

exemplary damages, which amount is left to the sound discretion of the Honorable Court;

19. Answering defendant by reason of the baseless and unwarranted complaint was forced to secure the services of counsel to defend his interest, against PLAINTIFFS nasty action, incurring legal expenses of not less than Php 50,000.00 exclusive of appearance fees of Php 2,000.00 per court hearing.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, ANSWERING DEFENDANT RESPECTFULLY PRAYS THAT THE HONORABLE COURT:

1.

ORDER THE DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLIANT AGAINST ANWERING DEFENDANT JUAN BATO;

2.

ORDER THE PLAINTIFFS TO PAY ANSWERING DEFENDANT JUAN BATO DAMAGES OF NOT LESS NOT PHP 50,000.00, WITH

EXEMPLARY DAMAGES AS THE HONORABLE COURT MAY FIND REASONABLE AND ATTORNEYS FEES OF NOT LESS

BATONGBAKAL VS. BATO CIVIL CASE NO. 10287622 ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

page 6 of 6

THAN PHP 50,000.00 EXCLUDING PHP 2,000.00 PER COURT APPEARANCE, INCLUDING COST OF SUIT;

ANSWERING DEFENDANT JUAN BATO PRAYS FOR OTHER SUCH RELIEF AS MAY BE JUST AND EQUITABLE IN THE PREMISES.

Malilipot, Albay for Tabaco City, Philippines. November 25, 2007.

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

Republic of the Philippines ) City of Legazpi ) S.s. I, JUAN BATO, of legal age, single, Filipino citizen, with address at Washington Drive, Legazpi City, Philippines, under oath: DECLARE: 1. That I am DEFENDANT in the above captioned case; 2. That I caused the preparation and filing of the ANSWER with COUNTERCLAIM; 3. That I have read and fully understood the allegations therein, the same being true and correct of my own personal knowledge and based on authentic records; And CERTIFY: 4. That I have not commenced any action or filed any claims involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency; and 5. That to the best of my knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency; and
6. That I should hereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is

pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other court or quasijudicial agency, I shall report that fact to this Court within five (5) days from notice.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereby affix my signature this 25 th day of November, 2007 at Legazpi City, Philippines.

JUAN BATO Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to me before this 25th day of November, 2007 at Malilipot, Albay, Philippines; affiant, who is personally known to me, appeared and exhibited to me his Community Tax Certificate No. 1339940 issued on Jan. 6, 2007 and acknowledged that the VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST NON-FORUM SHOPPING attached to the COMPLAINT was freely and voluntarily executed.

BY:

LARA BRUSOLA-BOBIS Notary Public-Province of Albay Valid until December 31, 2011 COMM. No. 2005-05 Roll No. 75125/May 9, 2010 IBP No. 123456-Albay 01/02/2010 PTR No. 987654-J 01/02/2010-MALILIPOT,ALBAY TIN 930-995-395 With office at Real St. Malilipot, Albay

Doc. No. _____ Page No. _____ Book No._____ Series of 2007