Republic of the Philippines
Third Judicial Region
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT
Sta. Maria, Bulacan
Government Service Insurance System(GSIS),
Plaintiff,
-versus- Civil Case No:
2277
For: Unlawful Detainer
DIGNA MALLO and all
other persons claiming rights under Her,
Defendants.
x-----------------------------------------------x
MOTION TO ADMIT ANSWER
Defendant RODERICK BATOCTOY, assisted by the
Public Attorney’s Office, through the undersigned counsel,
unto this Honorable Court most respectfully avers the following:
1. That on 23 May 2018 , defendant received Summons with
the attached complaint from the Honorable Court
requiring Defendant to file an Answer within ten (10) days
from receipt;
2. That Defendant was not able to file an Answer within ten
(10) days from receipt due the fact that he was looking for
a lawyer to represent his case but he was not successful.
1|Page
3. That Defendant was also not able to file the necessary
Motion to Extend Time to File an Answer due to the same
reason;
4. That it is hereby respectfully submitted that no prejudice
is caused to the Plaintiffs in this case if the Answer of the
Defendant would be admitted by the Honorable Court, as
Plaintiff has not yet filed any Motion for the Declaration of
the Defendants in Default or for Summary Judgment, and
that no expenditure of money will be charged of it in the
event of the admission of the pleading.
5. That Defendant begs the indulgence of the Honorable
Court, in consonance with the pertinent ruling of the
Supreme Court on the matter, to wit:
“Where is no declaration of default
, the answer may be admitted even if
filed out of time –the rule is that
the defendant’s answer should be
admitted where it is filed before a
declaration of default and no prejudice
is caused to the plaintiff.” [ Sablas
versus Sablas, 526 SCRA 292 ].”
“Default judgments are frowned
upon, and the Supreme Court has been
advising the court below, to the liberal
in setting aside default orders to give
both parties every chance to present
their case fairly without resort to
technicality.” [ Republic versus
Sandiganbayan, 540 SCRA 431 ].
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing consideration, the
Defendant hereby respectfully prays for this Honorable Court that
his Answer attached to this Motion, in the instant case, be
admitted, in the interest of justice and fair play.
Other relief and remedies just and equitable under the
premises are likewise prayed for.
PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
M. De Leon Street,
2|Page
Poblacion, Sta. Maria, Bulacan
MARIA LOVELLA C. SAMERA
Public Attorney III
Roll No: 55476; 08 May 2008
IBP O.R. No. 011114 (Lifetime Member)
MCLE Compliance No: V-0013556; 09 September 2015
RODERICK BATOCTOY
Defendant
EXPLANATION
(Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 New Rules of Civil
Procedure)
The foregoing pleading is hereby served by registered mail,
personal service not being practicable in view of the limited number
of office personnel who will carry out this mode of service.
ATTY. MARIA LOVELLA C.
SAMERA
Copy furnished:
GSIS LEGAL SERVICES GROUP
GSIS Headquarters, Financial Center,
Reclamation Area, Pasay City 1300
3|Page
Republic of the Philippines
Third Judicial Region
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT
Sta. Maria, Bulacan
Government Service Insurance System(GSIS),
Plaintiff,
-versus- Civil Case No:
2277
For: Unlawful Detainer
DIGNA MALLO and all
other persons claiming rights under Her,
Defendants.
x-----------------------------------------------x
ANSWER
Defendant RODERICK BATOCTOY, assisted by the
Public Attorney’s Office, through the undersigned counsel,
unto this Honorable Court most respectfully avers the following:
1. Defendant admits paragraphs 1;
2. Defendant specifically denies paragraph 2 because Digna
Mallo is no longer the occupant of the subject house and lot.
It is now defendant Roderick Batoctoy who is the new
awardee of the subject lot;
4|Page
3. Defendant admits paragraph 3;
4. Defendant partly admits paragraph 4 but with a qualification
that defendant is now the new awardee by reason of the fact
that he coordinated with the Government Service
Insurance System(GSIS) and now a new buyer of the
subject house and lot;
5. Defendant admits paragraph 5 with a qualification that
defendant Batoctoy is now the new awardee ;
6. Defendant specifically denies paragraph 6 and 7 for lack of
sufficient knowledge as to the truth of the matters alleged
therein;
7. Defendant specifically denies paragraphs 8 for Digna Mallo
cannot personally receive the Notice as she is no longer
occupying the subject house and lot . The more that
defendant Batoctoy could not receive the same because the
notice if there is any is not addressed to defendant Batoctoy;
8. Defendant specifically denies paragraph 9 for lack of
sufficient knowledge as to the truth of the matters alleged
therein;
9. Defendant specifically denies paragraph [Link] was no
Notice to Vacate received by Digna Mallo because it was no
longer possible physically as she has vacated the subject
house and lot when Roderick Batoctoy applied for the same.
10. Defendant specifically denies paragraphs 11 and 12 for
lack of sufficient knowledge as to the truth of the matters
alleged therein;
11. Plaintiff has no right to demand the aforesaid amount
since defendant’s possession of the subject property is a
matter of right in view of the Deed of Conditional Sale issued
in his favor as well as the approval of his application for loan.
Defendant has not received any Notice hence, the obligation
to pay did not arise as there was no demand received yet by
the defendant ;
12. Defendant specifically denies paragraph 13. He did not
receive the alleged Notice to Vacate allegedly sent by the
5|Page
plaintiff. Hence, the alleged rental being claimed by the
plaintiff reckoned from 07 May 2017 has no basis;
13. Defendant specifically denies paragraph 14 for lack of
sufficient knowledge as to the truth of the matters alleged
therein.
DISCUSSION/ARGUMENTS
14. Defendant hereby re-plead the foregoing facts.
The Defendant In This Case
Is an Occupant In Good Faith
15. Defendant’s stay in the subject lot is justified as he
applied as the new buyer and was approved by the plaintiff.
16. He has no knowledge that there was a Notice of
Cancellation nor Demand to Vacate. Therefore, there could be
no unjustified refusal to vacate on the part of the defendant to
warrant the amount prayed for by the plaintiff.
Plaintiff Has no Cause of
Action Against the
Defendants
17. Plaintiff has no right to demand from the defendant the
rentals. Plaintiff has not shown any document to prove that
defendant received any Notice to Vacate nor Cancellation of their
Contract to Sell. Further, his continued stay in the subject
property is by virtue of the approval given by the plaintiff to him
as the new buyer of the subject lot;
Defendant Is Entitled to Moral Damages
18. Defendant suffered sleepless nights, anxiety and
besmirched reputation because of the actuations made by the
plaintiff in demanding him and his family to leave outright when
in fact, his stay is by virtue of a Deed of Conditional Sale and
approval of loan by the GSIS. Further, defendant has been
coordinating with the plaintiff for restructuring of the loan
6|Page
agreement or even to the point of starting from scratch for their
continued stay in the subject property. It was the plaintiff who
was not cooperating with the intention of unjustifiably
relinquishing the defendant of any right whatsoever in the
subject property;
Defendant Is Entitled to
Attorney’s Fees
19. Due to filing of this baseless case against the defendant, the
latter was constrained to secure the services of the Public
Attorney’s Office which entitle them to attorney’s fees. (pursuant
to R.A. 9406)
PRAYER
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, it is respectfully prayed of
this Honorable Court that the instant complaint be DISMISSED
for utter lack of merit and the Honorable Court award the
damages prayed for by the defendant.
Other relief and remedies just and equitable under the
premises are likewise prayed for.
PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
M. De Leon Street,
Poblacion, Sta. Maria, Bulacan
MARIA LOVELLA C. SAMERA
Public Attorney III
Roll No: 55476; 08 May 2008
IBP O.R. No. 011114 (Lifetime Member)
MCLE Compliance No: V-0013556; 09 September 2015
EXPLANATION
(Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 New Rules of Civil
Procedure)
7|Page
The foregoing pleading is hereby served by registered mail,
personal service not being practicable in view of the limited number
of office personnel who will carry out this mode of service.
ATTY. MARIA LOVELLA C.
SAMERA
Copy furnished:
GSIS LEGAL SERVICES GROUP
GSIS Headquarters, Financial Center,
Reclamation Area, Pasay City 1300
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
I, RODERICK BATOCTOY , of legal age, Filipino, with resident at No. 024
Unit 004, Phase 2, Yellow Bell Street, Tierra de Santa Maria,Pulong Buhangin, Sta.
Maria, Bulacan, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, hereby
depose and state that:
1. I am a defendant in the above-captioned case;
2. The foregoing pleading was prepared at my instance;
3. I have read and understood the same and that all
allegations therein are true, correct and of our personal knowledge
and/or based on authentic documents;
4. I hereby certify that: (a) I have not commenced any other
action or proceeding involving the same issues with this Court, the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any other tribunal or agency;
(b) to the best of our knowledge, no such action or proceeding
involving the same issues is pending before this Court, the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals or any tribunal or agency; (c) if there is any
action or proceeding involving the same issues which is pending before
this Court, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any tribunal or
agency, I will state the status thereof; (d) if there is any action or
proceeding involving the same issues which is pending before this
Court, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any tribunal or
agency, I will report that fact within five (5) days from knowledge
thereof to this Honorable Court and to the court where the original
pleading had been filed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ____ June 2018 at
[Link], Bulacan.
8|Page
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ______ day of June 2018 at Sta.
Maria, Bulacan, affiant exhibited his Identification Card, bearing his photo and
signature and I am convinced that he is indeed the affiant herein.
9|Page