AMAL Answer To Action For Rescission of Contracts Bedial PDF

Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

12th Judicial Region
Branch ___
Tacurong City
Notaly Mae P. Badting, Plaintiff, CIVIL CASE No. 13301
- versus – FOR: Rescission of Contracts
Al-Zahar D. Saiden, Defendant.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM
Defendant, through the undersigned counsel, most respectfully files his Answer in
response to the Complaint of the Plaintiff and interpose as well as his counterclaim
against the latter, to wit:
1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint is admitted.
2. Paragraph 2 of the complaint is denied as the principal office of SHAN Import and
Export Company appearing in its Articles of Incorporation is located at Brgy. Kaluran,
Lutayan, Sultan Kudarat.
3. Paragraphs 3 to 7 of the Complaint are admitted.
5. Paragraph 8 of the Complaint is denied for lack of knowledge or information

sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity thereof, the allegations therein
being matters known only to, and are within the control only, of the plaintiff. Hence, it is
fictitious.
6. Paragraph 9 of the complaint is denied since as clearly indicated in the bill of lading;
the container was delivered 100% in accordance with the signed agreement.
7. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint is denied on the ground that obligation of the

defendant was already extinguished from the moment the container with number
PCIU6042774 was delivered and placed in the possession of the plaintiff. Hence, there is
no obligation to perform per se nor does it entail any additional obligation to be taken
by the defendant.
This study source was downloaded by 100000817668189 from CourseHero.com on 12-13-2022 01:15:40 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/30902545/AMAL-Answer-to-Action-for-Rescission-of-ContractsBedialpdf/
8. Paragraph 11 is denied as the contention of the plaintiff is bereft of merit because
the defendant was faithfully compliant with the obligation incumbent upon him as
stipulated in the agreement that plaintiff and defendant entered into.
SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
9. The plaintiff has no cause of action against the defendant since there was an actual
delivery made by the latter as appearing in the Bill of Lading signed by the plaintiff
herself indicative that the latter had performed completely his contractual obligations
to the former. Copy of said bill of lading is attached thereto. (See Annex A)
10. The motion to rescind the contract is unwarranted absence of ill motive on the part
of defendant to defraud the plaintiff and it was malicious to blame the former and
malign his business reputation to the public for the alleged act when in fact he has
been engaging in the said business for over 15 years and not a single incident in the
past has he ever sued for any fraudulent act by any of his costumers or buyers.
11. That it was absurd on the part of the plaintiff to blame the defendant for the empty
container granting arguendo that it was empty upon arrival when in fact it is a standard
procedure for an import/export company before transporting to undergo weighing
procedure in order to ascertain the total weight of the container as the basis for the
total freight charges and should there be any fraudulent act on the part of the
defendant, it would be apparent from the scale of the container that it was indeed
empty hence should have refused to transport the same considering that the plaintiff
has been engaging in the said business for over the years and the scale of empty
container or not is not hard for them to distinguish.
12. Hence, the action of the plaintiff to rescind the contract between the latter and the
defendant is untenable under Article 1191 of the Civil Code on Law on Obligations and
Contracts since there was a complete performance of obligations on the defendant
part and the alleged fraudulent act is bereft of merit.
13. That the plaintiff is not entitled to the return of 750,000 representing sum of the
container, the freight cost as well as the moral damages.
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
14. By reason of the instant precipitate and unfounded suit, the defendant was
constrained to hire the services of a lawyer to defend his rights and interests for a
professional fee of P30,000.00 plus P5,000.00 per court appearance;
15. Similarly, the plaintiff’s unfounded suit has caused the defendant mental anguish
and suffering and public humiliation and embarrassment which the defendant claims
moral damages of P300,000.00.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the complaint be
dismissed for lack of merit and the defendant’s compulsory counterclaim be granted,
i.e..attorney’s fees of P30,000.00 plus moral damages of P300,000.00, plus costs of suit.
The defendant respectfully prays for such and other reliefs as may be deemed
just and equitable in the premises.
City of Tacurong, 4th of July 2018.
ATTY. SABRE M. AMAL

Counsel for the defendant
SHAN Law Firm, Suite 89, Kimsan Bldg.,
Bonifacio Street, Tacurong City
PTR No. 1247838 1-20-2012 Tacurong City
IBP No. 911117 1-21-2012 Tacurong City
Roll No. 89994
MCLE Ex. No. 111-000748 1-13-2012
VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
Republic of the Philippines )

City of Tacurong, Sultan Kudarat ) S. S.
I, Al-Zahar D. Saiden, of legal age, Filipino citizen, Single and resident of Waling
Waling Street, Barangay New Isabela, Tacurong City after having duly sworn to in
accordance with law, do hereby depose and say:
1. That I am the defendant in the above-entitled case;
2. That I have read and caused the preparation of the foregoing Answer and have read
the allegations contained therein;
3. That all allegations in said Answer are true and correct of my own knowledge and
based on authentic records;
4. That I hereby certify that I have not commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best
of my knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein;
5. That if I should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is
pending, I hereby undertake to report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the
court or agency where the original pleading and sworn certification contemplated
herein have been filed;
6. That I executed this verification/certification to attest to the truth of the foregoing facts
and to comply with the provisions of Adm. Circular of the Honorable Supreme Court.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this 9th of November
2017 in the City of Tacurong.
Al-Zahar D. Saiden
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 9th day of November 2017, in the
City of Tacurong, affiant exhibiting to me his GSIS I.D. No. 12345 in the City of Tacurong
City.
Copy furnished:
ATTY. Hamseya A. Bedial

Counsel for the Plaintiff
Unit 1234 Laurel Building
Tacurong City.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

AMAL Answer To Action For Rescission of Contracts Bedial PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AMAL Answer To Action For Rescission of Contracts Bedial PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

AMAL Answer To Action For Rescission of Contracts Bedial PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Notaly Mae P. Badting, Plaintiff, CIVIL CASE No. 13301

- versus – FOR: Rescission of Contracts

Al-Zahar D. Saiden, Defendant.

ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint is admitted.

3. Paragraphs 3 to 7 of the Complaint are admitted.

5. Paragraph 8 of the Complaint is denied for lack of knowledge or information

7. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint is denied on the ground that obligation of the

SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

City of Tacurong, 4th of July 2018.

ATTY. SABRE M. AMAL

VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

Republic of the Philippines )

ATTY. Hamseya A. Bedial

You might also like