Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM
ADJUDICATION BOARD
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ADJUDICATOR
Magallanes, Iraya, Daet, Camarines Norte
____________________________________,
Plaintiff,
PARAD CASE NO. ___________________
-versus- FOR: “Maintenance of Peaceful
Possession & Cultivation
and Declaration of
Tenancy”
_______________________________,
Defendant.
x--------------------------------------------------------x
ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM
COMES NOW, plaintiff, ______________, through the
undersigned Public Attorney and to this Honorable Office, most
respectfully state:
1. That the allegations contained in paragraph 1 is admitted;
2. That the allegation contained in paragraph 2 is qualifiedly
admitted as to the truth that there is still a house erected in the
subject property. However, before filing of the said Motion for
Demolition by the Defendant-Petitioner, they already
demolished one of the houses erected at the said property last
June 13, 2018 without the Special Order for Demolition from
DARAB;
3. That the allegation contained in paragraph 3 is qualifiedly
admitted, as to the truth that the house erected in the subject
property was still there last May 17, 2018. However, said record
from the Barangay Certification is not enough to prove that the
Plaintiff-Respondent has the intention of not vacating the
subject property;
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
4. That Plaintiff-Respondent re-plead the foregoing allegations in
so far as they are relevant and material hereof and further
allege:
4.1. That in on June 13, 2018 the Defendant-Petitioner together
with _________________ went to the subject property and
without warning ______________ started the demolition of one
of the houses erected in the subject property even after the
protest and plea of __________________, Plaintiff-
Respondent’s wife, “Sinumpaang Salaysay” of
________________ to that effect is hereto attached as “Annex
A”, a video of the demolition is also attached hereto as “Annex
B”, pictures after the demolition is also attached hereto as
“Annex C” ;
5. That according to Rule 39 Sec. 10 (d) of the Rules of Court
Removal of improvements on property subject of execution. –
When the property subject of the execution contains
improvements constructed or planted by the judgment obligor
or his agent, the officer shall not destroy, demolish or remove
said improvements except upon special order of the court,
issued upon motion of the judgment obligee after due hearing
and after the former has failed to remove the same within
reasonable time fixed by the court;
6. That the Defendant-Petitioner filed a Motion for Demolition after
one of the houses erected in the subject property was
demolished by them;
7. That Defendant-Petitioner and ___________________ did not
attend the Barangay Conciliation called by Jeffrey and Emma
Carrascal concerning the demolition of the latter’s house
and they had no opportunity to settle amicably the dispute
before the said council;
COUNTERCLAIM
8. That by reason of the premature demolition of the Defendant-
Petitioner, the Plaintiff-Respondent was deprived of the
earnings of the store located at the demolished house and the
materials used in building the said house were rendered
useless. Hence, causing them so much disturbances of time
and spending incidental expenses, which could have been
avoided had plaintiffs been just, reasonable and fair to their
dealings;
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed before this Honorable
Office to grant the following:
a. Order the Defendant-Petitioner to pay Plaintiff-Respondent for
the actual and moral damages in the total amount of not less
than Php100,000.00;
b. Order the Defendant-Petitioner to pay Plaintiff-Respondent for
exemplary damages amounting to Php50,000.00.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.
September 20, 2018. Daet, Camarines Norte.
______________________________
VERIFICATION
I, ___________________, of legal age, Filipino, married and with
permanent residence in Purok 6, Alayao, Capaloga, Camarines Norte,
after being duly sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby depose and
state:
1. That I am the Plaintiff-Respondent in the above-entitled case;
2. That I have caused the Answer with counterclaim to be prepared;
3. That I have read and fully understood the contents thereof, all of
which are true to the best of my own personal knowledge and
belief, and supported by the record;
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature
this 20th day of September 2018 at Daet, Camarines Norte.
___________________
Affiant/ Plaintiff-Respondent
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 20th day of July
2018 at Daet, Camarines Norte, Plaintiff-Respondent exhibiting to me
his IDs Voter’s ID No. VIN: 2104-0104A-B1063JDC10001-6.
