Answer To Unlawful Detainer.docx

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT ILOILO CITY BRANCH 8

GABBY GUBAT, Plaintiff

CIVIL CASE No. 98765 -

Versus –

FOR: Unlawful Detainer

MEGAN OLD, Defendants. x---------------------------------x

ANSW ER (In re: Summons, Received on September 16, 2018)

COMES NOW, Defendants MEGAN OLD, by the undersigned counsel, in the above-entitled case and before this Honorable Court most respectfully submits this ANSWER and aver that:

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

1. This is a case for Unlawful Detainer founded allegedly on Plaintiffs’ claim of that defendant’s failed to pay her monthly rentals, specifically from the month of February up to the present; 2. Defendants received a copy of the Complaint and Summons on September 16, 2018 giving her until September 25, 2018 to file Defendant’s Answer;

ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS

3. Defendant admit Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Complaint in so far as the personal circumstances of the parties involved; 4. Defendant admit Paragraphs 3 and 4 that she did enter into a contract of lease with the Plaintiff’s house rental. 5. Defendant admit Paragraph 5 in so far that she did not pay the plaintiff the amount due for the said month of February up to the present date due to the defendant financial problem because the defendant was fired from her work and she is currently on a job hunting so that she can pay her bills especially the money she owes from the plaintiff. That the defendant and the plaintiff entered into a verbal contract that the former will pay the latter, once she can find a job. That the plaintiff agreed with her and allowed her to stay on the said house. 6. The defendant deny Paragraph 6 and 7. The demand letter that the plaintiff sent was not received by defendant personally but instead it was received by her neighbor. And the plaintiff failed to comply with the three notice rule that is a premise for filing a case in court. 7. The defendant deny Paragraph 8 of the Complaint for lack of knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity of the alleged amounts of attorney’s fees agreed upon between the plaintiff and her lawyer.

AND BY WAY OF COUNTERCLAIM

8. Due to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff with no sufficient bases, herein Defendant both suffered mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, and social humiliation. Defendants are suffering from pain – both physical and otherwise – and though moral damages may be beyond pecuniary

estimation, these may well be assessed for each Defendant at an

amount left to the of discretion of this Court. Our New Civil Code on Damages specifically provides the following legal bases for this

counterclaim of Defendants,

to wit:

“Article 2217. Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, freight, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded humiliation and similar injury Xxx

feelings, moral shock, social

PRAYER WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that judgment be rendered as follows: 1. DISMISSING THE CASE for failure to state cause/s of action and violation of the certification against forum shopping; 2. ORDERING Plaintiff to pay herein Defendants the following, to

wit:

2.1 Attorney’s Fees since Defendants were compelled to hire the services of the counsel for an agree sum of Thirty Thousand Pesos (PhP30,000.00), Philippine currency as Attorney’s Fees and the amount of Two Thousand Pesos (PhP2,000.00), Philippine currency, as Appearance Fee for each hearing in court; 2.2 Judicial costs and litigation expenses in the sum of Ten Thousand Pesos (PhP10,000.00),Philippine Currency; and 3. AWARDING Defendants moral and exemplary damages in the amount left to the sound discretion of this Honorable Court.

Defendants further pray for such other reliefs which are just and equitable under the premises.

VERIFICATION AND ANTI-FORUM SHOPPINFG CERTIFICATION

I, MEGAN OLD, of legal age, single, Filipino, and with postal address Malaiba, San Jose, Antique, under oath, depose: I am the defendant in the foregoing case; that I caused the preparation of the foregoing Answer; that I have read its contents; and that the same are true and correct of my own direct, personal knowledge. Further, pursuant to Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and existing Supreme Court circulars, I hereby certify that I have not heretofore commenced any other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency; that to the best of my knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency; and that if I should hereafter learn that other similar or related actions or proceedings has been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court,

the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to this court. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this September 20, 2018, Iloilo City, Philippines.

MEGAN OLD Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this January 17, 2019 at the City of Iloilo, Philippines, Affiant exhibited to me her Philippine Passport with No. P8912413B, Iloilo. I hereby certify that I have personally examined the affiant and I am satisfied that he voluntarily executed and understood the foregoing statements.

Christie Joi C. Navallasca NOTARY PUBLIC, SAN JOSE, ANTIQUE NOTARIAL COMMISSION REG NO 110 ISSUED ON APRIL 21, 2015, ILOILO CITY FOR A TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2019 RM. 9, Centillion Building, Salazar Street, San Jose Antique PTR No. 5294351/January 4, 2019/Antique IBP ID NO.1017323/January 4, 2006/Antique Attorney’s Roll No. 56433

Doc. No. 266; Page No. 5; Book No.X; Series of 2019

YELO LAW OFFICE Counsel for the Plaintiff Unit 123, Injap Tower Manduriao, Iloilo City By: Louise ReZes Roll of Attorney No. 98765 IBP No. 12345/2-5-12/Iloilo PTR No. 87654/12-22-11/Iloilo

EXPLANATION

A copy of this pleading is served via registered mail, instead of via personal service, on the adverse counsel due to the distance of his law office address and the lack of field staff of undersigned counsel at this time.

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.