REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
MAKATI CITY

PLAINTIFF

CIVIL CASE NO. 14-327

-versusDEFENDANT
x----------------------------------X

REVOCATION OF DEED OF
DONATION

ANSWER WITH
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS
TO THE
COMPLAINT DATED MARCH 21, 2014
Defendant, through counsel, most respectfully submits this ANSWER
WITH COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS TO THE COMPLAINT DATED MARCH 21,
2014 received on April 1, 2014, she alleges, that:
BY WAY OF ANSWER
A. To The Personal Circumstances
1. Defendant ADMITS the allegation in Number 1 of the COMPLAINT;
2. She admits residing at 25 Urdaneta Avenue, Urdaneta Village, Makati City,
but SPECIFICALLY DENIES the allegations as to a residence at Bella Villa
Condominiums, 5 Hamburg Street, MErville Subdivision, Paranaque City, as
alleged in Number 2 of the Complaint, Defendants residence remains at the
Urdaneta Home;
3. She ADMITS the allegations in Number 3 of the COMPLAINT;
B. To The Bases of the COMPLAINT Dated March 21, 2014
4. Defendant ADMITS the execution of the Deed of Donation, Annex A,
COMPLAINT, and the acceptance thereof on her behalf by her mother, as
stated in Number 4 of the COMPLAINT;

4.1 She ADMITS further the consideration in the Deed of Donation

that: For and in consideration of the love and affection (Not great
love and affection, as stated in Number 4 of the COMPLAINT) which
the DONOR (the plaintiff) has for the DONEE (the defendant) x x x,
and adds paragraph 3 of the Deed of Donation, Annex A,
COMPLAINT, that: The DONEE hereby accepts the donation of the
above-described personal properties and does hereby expresses
(sic) her gratitude for the kindness and liberality of the DONOR
5. The statements in Number 5 of the COMPLAINT are not statement of the
ultimate facts on which the party pleading relies on for his claims, Rule 8,
Section 1, the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, but are the plaintiffs
conclusions on the defendants conduct defendant started to exhibit
hostility and hatred towards him or the plaintiffs own thinking about his,
the plaintiffs motivations This was despite plaintiffs unwavering love,
sincere care, and consistent support for her welfare and well-being;
5.1 Nonetheless, these conclusions will be addressed by the
Defendant subsequently in the succeeding portions of this ANSWER
WITH COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS;
6. Defendant ADMITS throwing a glass at the direction of the plaintiff, ADMITS
not apologizing therefore, and finally ADMITS not talking to the plaintiff since
she and her mother returned to Manila from abroad in May 2009, while her
father continued his vacation therein, as alleged in Number 6 of the
COMPLAINT, but SPECIFICALLY DENIES the rest of the allegations and
conclusions therein, the truth of the matter being that, as stated in the
defendants allegedly scathing letter,
x x x. This same fight I mention here is one and the same with that
mentioned in your letter referencing to when I threw the glass in our
Vancouver kitchen in your direction while being forced to listen to the
exchange of anger down the hall. As someone who has thrown around
plates, trays, other glasses, silverwares, newspapers, remote controls,
hurtful words, and banged tabletops in bouts of anger and frustration
himself, I expected you to realize that that was my response to
overwhelming anger I was feeling towards the situation then. In the
same instance you tried to hit my face with my laptop, But did not do
so, instead slammed it into the floor. X x x
7. She ADMITS seeing her plaintiff-father at the Manila Cathedral and turning
away from him, as alleged in Number 6 of the COMPLAINT, but this happened
in June 24, 2010, not August 2009; she specifically DENIES the rest of the
allegations and conclusions therein, the truth of the matter is ascan clearly
be gleaned on the defendants allegedly scathing letter,

x x x. I was next in line for the comfort room when you walked by
and felt a slight touch on my elbow, only to turn around to see a
person I hadnt spoken to in a couple of years, a person who
threatened to slam my face with a laptop. X x x. You would forgive me
if I wasnt to keen on showering my affection on a person whose
memories I have about consist of those things.
8. Defendant has no knowledge or information as to the truth of the term paper
written of in the first paragraph Number 8 of the COMPLAINT; she adds
however, that, as stated in said defendants scathing letter, also:
To address another point made, I really dont know what term paper
you are referring to in your letter, that which you say contains
statements blatantly displaying how much I hate you. X x x. I dont find
a need to publicize, and what more exaggerate, parent-child problems
to individuals who have nothing to do with the situation so I dont
understand how you can claim this.
8.1 She has no knowledge or information as to the truth of the
allegations and ending conclusion expressed in the second
paragraph of Number 8;
9. As to the Number 9 of the COMPLAINT, she ADMITS the filing of Case No. 12338, for cancellation of adverse claim and recovery of damages, Regional
Trial Court, Makati City, Branch 150, subsequent to the annotation, by the
plaintiff, of an adverse claim on the property located at 25 Urdaneta Avenue,
Urdaneta Village, covered by TCT No. 198462 of the Registry of Deed of
Makati City in the name of the Defendants mother and defendant, but
specifically DENIES these statements therein xxx defendant added insult to
the injury she had already caused plaintiff and This suit was done with
sinister motives or ill-will, as these statements are conclusions not ultimate
facts;
9.1 To explain this corollary issue, so goes the beginning of paragraph
2, Number 9 COMPLAINT, and the succeeding paragraphs, should be
done in the RTC 148 and 150 of Makati City, not in this Court;
9.2 In Number 9, Complaint, the plaintiff painted an incomplete
picture of the controversy by including only Civil Case No. 12-338 of
RTC 150, Makati City, to complete the picture, to view the
controversy in its entirety and to give the proper context to the
filing of this case, the defendant lists down the cases between
husband against wife, husband/father against wife and daughter,
wife and daughter against husband/father, and father against
daughter, as the case herein;

The proper context therefore, is not to view this case only in

connection with Civil Case No. 12-338, as Number 9, Complaint does, but to
view the set of nine (9) cases involving the parties;
10. She ADMITS her graduation from the De La Salle University in 2013, this
being alleged in Number 10 of the COMPLAINT, but she has no knowledge or
information as to the truth of the rest of the allegations and conclusions
therein;
11. Of all the statements in Number 11 of the COMPLAINT, she, the defendant
ADMITS only the writing of July 9, 2013 letter, the payment by the plaintiff of
the defendants tutition fees, and the P88,000.00 monthly allowance, she,
the defendant has no knowledge or information as to the truth of the other
allegations and conclusions therein, It is every fathers responsibility to
provide for his child. If parents expected reimbursement for every good thing
they did for their children, then kids might as well move out and live on their
own the moment they transition from crawling to walking to avoid incurring
debt;
12. Defendant ADMITS Article 765 of the Civil Code, as reproduced in Number
12 of the COMPLAINT;
13. The sentence in Number 13, COMPLAINT, that Here, defendant
committed a series of acts that constitute an offense against the person,
honor, or property of the plaintiff is a conclusion, which is nonetheless
SPECIFICALLY DENIED;
14. She ADMITS the summary of the ruling in Noceda vs CA, but SPECIFICALLY
DENIES the applicability of the citation to her, Noceda being a decided case
whereas Civil Case Nos. 12-338 and 13-857 are still pending;
C. To The Claim For Damages
15. She has no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of these averments, which are likewise conclusions, in the COMPLAINT.
16. Further, the plaintiff claims at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00) as moral damages, at least One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00) as exemplary damages; and at least Five Hundred Thousand
Pesos (P500,000.00) as reimbursement to procure the services of counsel
for a fee and incur expenses of litigation. As the amount of damages
determines the filing fee, in part, at least damages can not be an accurate
basis for determining the filing fee. If the filing fee was based partly, on the
amounts of P100,000.00, P100,000.00, and P500,000.00, then this
basis for computation is wrong on the recitations of the COMPLAINT; the
claims for damages must be dismissed early;

BY WAY OF SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Defendant repleads and incorporates by way of references the
allegations in 1-16 above, under the heading By Way of Answer;
2. FAILURE TO MEET CONDITION PRECEDENT. A condition precedent
for filing the claim has not been complied with
2.1 The suit is between a father and his daughter, Complaint, as
averred in Number 3 of the COMPLAINT, and under Article 151 of
the Family Code:
No suit between members of the same family shall prosper unless it
should appear from the verified complaint or petition that earnest
efforts towards a compromise have been made, but that the same
have failed. If it is shown that no such efforts were in fact made, the
case must be dismissed.
The rule shall not apply to cases which may not be the subject of
compromise under the Civil Code.
2.2 The suit is not covered by Article 2035 of the Civil Code, providing
that:
Art. 2035. No compromise upon the following questions shall be
valid:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

The civil status of persons;

The validity of a marriage or a legal separation;
Any ground for legal separation;
Future support;
The jurisdiction of courts;
Future legitime.

2.3 The condition precedent for filing the claim not having been
complied with the case must be dismissed. There were no earnest
efforts at a compromise, and the failure of the same.
3. PRESCRIPTION OF SOME BASES OF ACTION. On the Authority of
Article 769 of the Civil Code, thus:
The action granted to the donor by reason of ingratitude cannot be
renounced in advance. This action prescribes within one year, to be

counted from the time the donor had knowledge of the fact and it was
possible for him to bring the action.
the bases for the alleged ingratitude set out in Numbers 6, 7, 8 and 9
of the Complaint are barred by prescription, the plaintiff-donor having
knowledge of these bases for the alleged ingratitude as of the dates
set therein, and it being possible for the plaintiff-donor to have brought
the action on these grounds within the one-year period.
4. VIOLATION OF RULE 7, SECTION 5 OF THE RULES OF COURT.
The plaintiff alleged in Number 9 of the COMPLAINT a pending case,
Civil Case 12-338.
Civil Case No. 13-857 for reconveyance and damages, and pending
also before the RTC 148 of Makati City is an action similar to Civil Case
No. 12-338. The only case cited in Number 9, COMPLAINT, is the latter,
the former being completely omitted.
The omission of any mention of this case in the Plaintiffs Verification
and Certification of Non-Forum Shopping is a violation of Section 5,
Rule 7, the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and is a ground for dismissal
of the case without prejudice.
5. NO CAUSE OF ACTION. The plaintiff considers his not being invited to
the defendants college graduation, set forth in Number 6 of the
COMPLAINT, as the ultimate expression of ingratitude and disrespect,
from a person with whom he had invested time, money and efforts on.
There is NO CAUSE OF ACTION- not being invited to ones daughters
graduation exhibits either bad form, bad manners, or a failure of
investment.
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS
1. The defendant has suffered added mental anguish, more serious
anxiety, and greater moral shock, for which she prays for moral
damages, in the amount of P1,000,000.00, the moral damage prayed
for being the proximate result of this latest wrongful act, the present
suit;
2. The defendant prays for exemplary damages in the amount of
P500,000.00, by way of example of correction for the public good, and;
3. The defendant finally prays for attorneys fees in the amount of
P500,000.00, to defend against this unfounded, malicious and baseless
suit.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, it is most respectfully prayed that
the COMPLAINT be DISMISSED and that judgment be rendered for the
defendant on her counterclaims.
Other reliefs just and equitable are prayed for.
Makati City, 10 April 2014.
SIGNED: COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT
COPY FURNISHED: PLAINTIFF AND COUNSEL

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, Name of Defendant, of legal age, after having been duly sworn in
accordance with law, depose and state that:
1. I am the Defendant in the above-stated case;
2. I caused the preparation of the foregoing complaint;
3. I have read the contents thereof and the facts stated therein are true and
correct of my personal knowledge and/or on the basis of copies of documents
and records in my possession;
4. Other than the Compulsory Counterclaims contained herein, I have not
heretofore commenced any action or filed any claim 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.
4.1 Civil case No. 13-857 of the RTC 148 Makati City, is an action
similar to Civil Case No. 12-338, mentioned in number 9 of the Complaint,
this case is still pending, as Civil Case 12-338;
4.2 The cases related to the filing of this present case, I respectfully,
are the eight (8) other cases mentioned in Number 9 of My Answer with

Counterclaims, under the heading By Way of Answer these cases are still
pending;
5. If I should thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding 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 Honorable Court.

___________________________
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ___ day of __________

200_ at _________________ affiant exhibiting to me his Community Tax
Certificate No.____________________ issued on ________________ 200_ at
______________
City.

Doc.
Page
Book
Series of 200_.

No.
No.
No.

;
;
;