Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1-19-10 Luz
1-19-10 Luz
Supreme Court
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES
Lagao, General Santos City
Branch 2
ANSWER
4. Paragraph 4 is admitted;
6. Paragraph 6 of the complaint is admitted as far as the right to cancel the contract
in case in default of payment is concerned for the law and the contract of
mortgage governed the parties, but denied having been in patent violation of the
DCS, to the contrary, the vendor was the one violating it because the materials
used in the housing unit were substandard that at present , unit is not
deteriorating;
9. Paragraphs 9 & 10 are mere conclusions of the Plaintiff from its self-serving
facts, hence being denied for lack of basis sufficient to form a belief;
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
10. Defendant repleads and incorporate all the admissions, denials and allegations
in the preceding paragraphs and hastens to add;
11. Plaintiff has no better right to have a physical possession over the subject
parcel of land and the residential unit for the following reasons:
c. Granting that the action for ejectment is a proper remedy, the same had
already having been lapsed as the action from 1992 to 2001 which
requires that the same be done within ten (10) years;
12. Plaintiff’s representative has no authority to file this case for there is nothing
mentioned his specific name in its Board Resolution No. 64.
13. Having prescription sets in and the remedy being undertaken is not a proper
remedy, Plaintiff therefore has no cause of action against Defendant, and
hence, the instant case should be outright dismissed.
PRAYER
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Copy furnished:
LUZ ENCALLADO
Atty. Estrella C. Elamparo Registry Reciept #:______ Defendant
Conusel for the Plaintiff Date:__________
GSIS Financial Center, Pasay City