Answer

Republic of the Philippines
6th Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Iloilo City
Branch 33
MAY SAMANTHA MACAHIG,
Plaintff,
- versus Preliminary
Civil Case No. 13-2678

For: Quieting of Title with
Application for
Injunction
Jennifer Castillo
Defendant.
X -------------------------------------------------- X
VERIFIED ANSWER WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
COMES NOW, the DefendantJENNIFER CASTILLO,
through the undersigned counsels, unto this Honorable
Court, most respectfully states that:
MATERIAL DATES
Defendant, through counsel, received a copy of the
Complaint filed by plaintiff on December 6, 2013; that this
answer is timely filed within the reglementary period under
the Rules of Court.
ADMISSIONS and DENIALS
1. Defendant Jennifer Castillo admits the following
allegations in the complaint, namely Paragraphs 1, 2, 4,
6 and 7.
2. Paragraph 5 is partially admitted insofar as there was a
Deed of Donation executed by Don Roberto Castillo in
favour of plaintiff. However, the donation was void ab
initio as it was made without the knowledge and
consent of Dona Margarita Castillo.
3. Paragraph 8 is partially admitted with regard to the
existence of the extra-judicial settlement. However,
such extra-judicial settlement is not prejudicial to any
persons title.
4. Paragraph 9 is specifically denied. No title may be
acquired from a void contract; hence, the extra-judicial
settlement of the defendant casts no cloud upon

anyones title. In fact, it is the existence of plaintiffs
void donation which casts a cloud upon defendants
title on the property in question.
5. Defendant has no knowledge of the facts stated in
paragraph 10.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
THE ALIENATION OF THE CONJUGAL PROPERTY IS VOID
AB INITIO
6. All property acquired during the marriage, whether the
acquisition appears to have been made, contracted or
registered in the name of one or both spouses, is
presumed to be conjugal unless the contrary is proved. 1
As evidenced by the transfer certificate of title
submitted by plaintiff, the property in dispute was
registered under the name of Don Roberto Castillo on
the 24th of May 2006. Don Roberto Castillo and Doa
Margarita Castillo were married on May 28, 1963.
7. Under Article 125 of the Family Code, neither spouse
may alienate any conjugal partnership property without
the consent of the other. The Deed of Donation clearly
shows that the donation in favour of plaintiff May
Samantha is without the consent of Doa Margarita
Castillo.
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
Defendant Jennifer Castillo, hereby repleads and
incorporates the foregoing by way of reference insofar as
they are relevant and material hereto, and by way of
counter-claim, respectfully aver THAT:
8. Defendant Jennifer Castillo is the daughter of Roberto
Miguel Castillo, son of Don Roberto Castillo. Roberto
Miguel predeceased his father Don Roberto, hence,
1Article 116, Family Code.

2
Jennifer stands in the place of Roberto Miguel as an heir

of Don Roberto.
9. Don Roberto Castillo died on January 18, 2010 due to
old age and was survived by his spouse Doa Margarita
Castillo and herein defendant Jennifer Castillo.
10.
Don Roberto left no will, hence, on ___, Doa
Margarita and Jennifer executed an extra-judicial
settlement to partition between and among them the
estate of Don Roberto.
11.
Among the properties adjudicated to Jennifer was
the property alleged to be donated to plaintiff May
Samantha.
12.
Jennifer found out about the existence of the
alleged void donation when she went to survey the
property. Hence, Jennifer sought the reconveyance of
the property from May Samantha.
13.
As the demands made by Jennifer fell on deaf ears,
she was constrained to seek the advice of the
undersigned counsel. A demand letter was thereafter
sent to May Samantha on ___.
14.
May Samantha alleged that Jennifer threatened
the teachers, parents and students of Smiley Learning
Center. Due to such malicious imputations, Jennifer
suffered sleepless nights and besmirched reputation.
15.
Because of plaintiff May Samanthas unjust refusal
of reconveying the property to its rightful owner,
defendant Jennifer Castillo is constrained to seek the
assistance of the undersigned counsels.
CONCLUSION
16.
In sum, the donation made in favour of May
Samantha was void and the extra-judicial settlement
adjudicating the property to Jennifer is valid for the
following reasons:
15.1 The donation was void ab initio, being made

without the consent of Doa Margarita Castillo.
15.2 The donation being void ab initio, the property
forms part of the estate of Don Roberto upon his death.
15.3 Jennifer, as a legal heir of Don Roberto Castillo, is
entitled to inherit from the latter.
OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OF

WRIT OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
A restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction may
only be issued if the applicant has shown, with clear and
convincing evidence, that the following requisites are
present: (1) his right is clear and unmistakable; (2) the
invasion of their right sought to be protected is material and
substantial; and (3) there is an urgent and paramount
necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage.
The applicant, May Samantha Macahig has failed to
show the existence of the requisites.
First, May Samantha claims ownership over the
disputed property by virtue of the Deed of Donation
executed by Don Roberto in her favour. She alleged that she
is the registered owner of said property. However, the Deed
of Donation is void ab initio because being a conjugal
property, such donation requires the consent of Doa
Margarita Castillo, the legal wife of the alleged donor. May
Samantha must have been aware of the invalidity of the
deed because no step was made by her to register the
property in her name.
Second, no legal rights of the applicant was invaded by
the Jennifer. The applicant, May Samantha, herself has
admitted that Jennifer has sent a letter demanding the
reconveyance of the property, otherwise, the latter shall be
forced to resort to legal action. Resort to a legal action in
order to justify ones claim is not tantamount to an invasion
of ones rights, but would rather ensure that peaceful and
legal means would be undertaken in the settlement of the
dispute.
4
Third, there is no urgent and paramount necessity to

prevent serious damage. The applicant May Samantha,
alleged that Jennifer has threatened the parents, teachers
and students of Smiley Learning Center, hence the need for
preliminary injunction. Such allegations were mere malicious
imputations. Assuming arguendo that such allegations were
true, Jennifer has already manifested her intention to bring
the matter to the courts should May Samantha refuse to
reconvey the property to the former. Hence, there is no
urgent and paramount necessity to prevent serious damage.
Based on the forgoing, there is no need for the issuance
of preliminary injunction. No imminent nor threatened injury
to the rights of May Samantha exists as Jennifer, has already
expressed her intention to bring the matter to the courts
even before May Samantha has filed this present action.
Hence, as both parties has already manifested their intention
to let the courts settle the matter in dispute, no preliminary
injunction is necessary.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is most
respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that after hearing
on the merits:
1.)
Deny the application of preliminary injunction;
2.)
Declare the Deed of Donation as void ab initio;
3.)
Declare that herein defendant is the rightful owner
of the questioned parcel of land;
4.)
Award moral damages in favour of defendant
Jennifer Castillo; and
5.)
Grant attorneys fees and costs.
Defendant and counsel also pray for such other relief

consistent with justice and equity.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this March 16, 2016 in Iloilo
City, Philippines.
5
ATTY. JOSE MARIA BORROMEO DELA LLANA

Notary Public Iloilo City
Appointment No. M-308
Until December 31, 2017
Roll No. 020381
PTR No. 10064532, 1-20-12
IBP No. 989977, 1-23-12
Office BORROMEO Bldg.
Gen. Luna St., Iloilo City
Copy furnished:
ATTY. GLAIZA MAE PADLAN

ATTY. IRIS PAULINE TAGANAS
ATTY. JOHN PAUL MACABABAD
Counsels for Plaintiff

Answer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Answer

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Answer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

6th Judicial Region

Civil Case No. 13-2678

settlement of the defendant casts no cloud upon

1Article 116, Family Code.

Jennifer stands in the place of Roberto Miguel as an heir

15.1 The donation was void ab initio, being made

OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OF

Third, there is no urgent and paramount necessity to

Deny the application of preliminary injunction;

Declare the Deed of Donation as void ab initio;

Grant attorneys fees and costs.

Defendant and counsel also pray for such other relief

ATTY. JOSE MARIA BORROMEO DELA LLANA

ATTY. GLAIZA MAE PADLAN

You might also like