Sample Pre Trial
Sample Pre Trial
Sample Pre Trial
Layla A. Sanchez,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL CASE NO. 1234
For: Forcible entry with Prayer
-versus- for issuance for destruction or
removal of the things planted by
defendant without payment of
indemnity, payment of damages
and prayer for TRO and Writ of
Preliminary Mandatory Injunction
Balmond C. Dalanghari,
and all persons claiming
rights under them,
Defendant.
X-------------------------X
C O M P LA I N T
(With Prayer for the Issuance of a TRO and a Writ of Preliminary Mandatory
Injunction)
Page 2 of 12
property, and putting up a fence around it, clearly preventing plaintiff
in performing possessory acts on the said property;
Page 3 of 12
11.Defendant unlawfully deprived plaintiff of her enjoyment and
possession of the subject land through force, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth, specifically by putting a fence, constructing a nipa
hut and planting crops within the subject property which were not
authorized, permitted or tolerated by plaintiff from the onset, and
continuously refusing to vacate the subject property;
13.In clarifying the requisites for forcible entry, the Supreme Court in
Abad v. Farrales1 stated that there are two allegations which are
indispensable in actions for forcible entry, to wit:
Page 4 of 12
Second, that the defendant deprived him of such possession by
means of force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth.
17.It must also be mentioned that the defendant illegally made plantings
on the property of the plaintiff. As such, the plantings were made in
bad faith. Thus, the plaintiff may demand the removal of the planting
or sowing, in order to replace things in their former condition at the
expense of the person who planted or sowed in bad faith pursuant to
Article 449 and 450 of the Civil Code which states:
Page 5 of 12
Article 450. The owner of the land on which anything has
been built, planted or sown in bad faith may demand the
demolition of the work, or that the planting or sowing be removed,
in order to replace things in their former condition at the expense
of the person who built, planted or sowed; or he may compel the
builder or planter to pay the price of the land, and the sower the
proper rent.
18.It must be emphasized that the planting or sowing was made in bad
faith by the defendant, having known fully well that he has no valid or
even a mere colorable title to the said lot, as such, he had no right to
plant or sow in the property of another;
Page 6 of 12
21.Furthermore, Section 3 of Rule 58 enumerates the grounds when the
issuance of preliminary injunction may prosper, to wit:
2 Toyota Motor Philippines Corporation v. The Court of Appeals et al., G.R. No. 102881 (1992).
Page 7 of 12
of said right. In particular, for a writ of preliminary injunction to
issue, the existence of the right and the violation must appear in
the allegations of the complaint and an injunction is proper also
when the plaintiff appears to be entitled to the relief demanded in
his complaint…” (Emphasis supplied)
24.The unlawful acts of the defendant have caused and still causing
great and irreparable injury to the plaintiff due to the following
reasons:
c. Plaintiff lost and is still losing her privileges and benefits, such
as at the very least being able to receive just rental
compensation for defendant’s unlawful stay in the subject land.
Page 8 of 12
25.Unless defendant is barred, restrained or prohibited from performing
further acts prejudicial to the plaintiff, the latter’s rights of ownership,
possession, use, benefit and enjoyment of the subject land, will be
severely impaired;
DAMAGES
28.Being the rightful owner, plaintiff has been harvesting the plantings
and crops from the subject property ever since she acquired the same,
as evidenced by a picture of plantings of plaintiff last year and the
receipt of payment for the agricultural products which she harvested
and sold on the same year, attached and marked here as Annex 10 and
Annex 11, respectively. Thus the act of defendant dispossessing her of
the subject property prevented her from planting and harvesting the
plantings and crops on the subject property this year, thereby
depriving her of profits from said harvest. As such, plaintiff is entitled
to a actual damages for P50,000, based on her previous harvest;
Page 9 of 12
29.Because of said illegal intrusion by defendant on the property not
belonging to them but to the plaintiff through force, intimidation,
strategy or stealth, plaintiff was forced to hire the services of counsel
and pay attorney’s fees in the amount of P50,000 and P2,000 for every
appearance of counsel in the instant case which payment of attorney’s
fees is justified under Article 2208 of the New Civil Code. A copy of
the Statement of Account and Official receipt of the corresponding
payment for legal services are hereby attached and marked as Annex
12 and Annex 13.
PRAY E R
1. Upon filing of this Complaint, the Honorable Court issue a TRO and
Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction ordering the defendant,
their agents, representatives and any one acting for and on their
behalf, to restore plaintiff of her possession of the subject property;
Page 10 of 12
b. Declaring defendant to have unlawfully deprived plaintiff of
possession of the subject land by force, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth;
Plaintiff prays for such other and further relief as may be just and
equitable under this premises with costs against defendant.
Layla A. Sanchez
Plaintiff
Assisted by:
Page 11 of 12
3. That I have read and fully understood the allegations in said
Complaint;
4. That the allegations of said Complaint are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge;
5. I hereby certify under oath that I have not filed any case before any
Court or quasi-judicial agency involving the same issues stated in the
instant complaint;
6. That neither is one pending in any Court or quasi-judicial agency
involving the same issues as those alleged in the instant complaint;
7. That should I learn that one has been filed or is pending in any Court
or quasi-judicial agency I shall endeavor within 5 days from
knowledge thereof to report the matter to the Court or quasi-judicial
agency concerned.
Page 12 of 12
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
Layla A. Sanchez
Balmond C. Dalanghari
x----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
Prefatory Statement
4. The plaintiff further claims for the value of the harvest on the
property of not less than P50,000 a year.
Page 2 of 5
9. As the owner of the aforementioned property, plaintiff had been in
prior possession of the said property from the time it was acquired;
10.As early as July 2, 2020, within one year from the filing of the
complaint, plaintiff was deprived of her possession as the present
owner of the property by the defendants through force,
intimidation, strategy or stealth when plaintiff saw defendant
constructing a nipa hut and has made plantings in bad faith, in the
said property;
11. On July 3, 2020, defendant constructed a fence surrounding the
property, completely depriving plaintiff of possession of her own
property.
E. Proposed Issues
12. Whether or not the defendant is guilty of forcible entry?
F. Documentary Evidence
17. A copy of the Deed of Absolute Sale showing the sale of land to
plaintiff is attached as Annex 2;
Page 3 of 5
20. A copy of the Real Property Tax Receipt is herein attached as
Annex 5;
21. A copy of the picture of the nipa hut is herein attached as Annex
6;
26. A copy of the Statement of Account from KC Law Firm for legal
services rendered for plaintiff is attached as Annex 12;
27. A copy of the Official Receipt issued by KC Law Firm for the
corresponding payment for legal services is attached as Annex 13.
G. Testimonial Evidence
Page 4 of 5
previously harvested agricultural products on the land and
Balmond entered the property through force, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth and constructed a nipa hut, erected a fence and
planted crops in bad faith.
H. Admissions
I. Applicable Laws
29. Plaintiff submits that this case would have to be resolved primarily
on the basis of Rule 70 of the Rules of Court for Forcible Entry,
Rule 58 of the Rules of Court for Preliminary Injunction, Articles
449 and 450 of the New Civil Code with regard to planters in bad
faith and the New Civil Code provisions pursuant to damages.
J. Trial Dates
30. Plaintiff will submit her preferred trial dates during the pre-trial,
after she has verified the availability of Defendant’s counsel and
has the calendar of this Honorable Court.
Respectfully submitted.
Page 5 of 5
Republic of the Philippines )
Province of Cotabato )
City of Antipolo ) SS.
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT
Preliminary Statement
The person examining me is Atty. Zyra D. Kee with an address at KC Law
Firm, Bankers Village, Antipolo. The examination is being held at the same
address in Tagalog dialect which I understand. I am answering her questions
fully conscious that I do so under oath and may face criminal liability for
false testimony and perjury.
Q.2. Bakit ka nandito ngayon sa opisina at isasampa ang kaso laban kay
Balmond C. Dalanghari? (Why are you now here in the office and file the
instant Complaint against Balmond C. Dalanghari?)
A.2. Nais kong mag-file ng isang Reklamo dahil labag sa batas na ipinagkait
sa akin ni Balmond ang kasiyahan at pag-sakop ng aking lupa sa
pamamagitan ng puwersa, pananakot, banta, diskarte o patago. (I want to file
a Complaint because Balmond unlawfully deprived me of the enjoyment and
possession of my property by through force, intimidation, threat, strategy or
stealth.)
Q.3. Ano ang pag-aari na ito na iyong tinukoy at saan ito mahahanap?
(What is this property that you’re referring to and where can it be found?)
A.3. Ito ay isang realty sa No. 00001 Leopoldo St., Bankers Village,
Antipolo City. (It is a realty in No. 00001 Leopoldo St., Bankers Village,
Antipolo City.)
Page 2 of 9
Q.5. Anong katibayan ang mayroon ka tungkol sa pagmamay-ari ng
nasabing pag-aari? (What proof do you have about the ownership of the
said property?)
A.5. Narito ang aking owner’s duplicate copy ko ng TCT No. T-876543. (I
have here the owner’s duplicate copy of TCT No. T-876543.)
Q.8. Kailan mo nabili ang propriedad na ito? (When did you acquire the
subject property?)
A.8. Noong 1997, binili ko ito mula kay Kadita M. Marina sa halagang
Limampung Libong Piso (P50,000). Matapos mabayaran nang buo,
nilagdaan namin ni Kadita ang isang Deed of Absolute Sale na inililipat ang
nasabing lote sa akin, na pinatunayan ng Notary Public. (Sometime in 1997, I
purchased it from Kadita M. Marina for Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000).
After paying in full, Kadita and I signed a Deed of Absolute Sale
transferring the said lot in my favor, authenticated by the Notary Public.)
Q.9. Dala mo ba ang nasabing Deed of Absolute Sale? (Do you have with
you the said Deed of Absolute Sale?)
A.9. Oo. (Yes.)
Page 3 of 9
B, sang-ayon ka ba? (I will attach this document in your Judicial Affidavit
as integral part hereof and mark the same as Exhibit B, do you agree?)
A.10. Oo, sang-ayon ako. (Yes, I agree.)
Page 4 of 9
Q.15. Sinabi mo sa iyong reklamo na pinagkaitan ka ng pag-aari at
kasiyahan ng nasabing propriedad sa pamamagitan ng puwersa,
pananakot, diskarte o patago. Maaari mo bang sabihin sa amin kung
paano? (You said in your complaint that you were unlawfully deprived of
the possession and enjoyment of the subject property by force,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth. Can you tell us how?)
A.15. Noong Hulyo 2, 2020, binisita ko ang aking nasabing lupain at nakita
ko si Balmond na tumatayo ng nipa hut sa aking lupain. Nakita ko rin ang
iba-ibang pananim na kanyang tinanim sa aking lupain. (On July 2, 2020, I
visited the subject land and I saw Balmond constructing a nipa hut inside my
property. I also saw his various plantings in my land.)
Q.17. Ano ang ginawa mo tungkol dito? (So what did you do about it?)
A.17. Noong Hulyo 4, 2020, nagsampa ako ng reklamo sa barangay, at
humingi ng tulong sa Punong Barangay para sa mapayapang pagtanggal kay
Balmond mula sa aking pag-aari, subalit, pagdating ko, nagulat ulit ako dahil
si Balmond ay nagtayo ng isang bakod na nakapalibot sa aking pag-aari. (On
July 4, 2020, I filed a complaint in the barangay, and asked the assistance of
the Punong Barangay for the peaceful removal of Balmond from my
property, however, upon arriving, I was again surprised as Balmond
constructed a fence surrounding my property.)
Q.18. Nalutas ba ang isyu sa antas ng Barangay? (Was the issue finally
resolved in the Barangay level?)
A.18. Hindi, nag isyu ang Punong Barangay ng certification na ang
maaaring na akong mag-sampa ng kaso sa korte. (No, the Punong Barangay
certified that the case can already be filed in court.)
Page 5 of 9
Q.19. Mayroon ka bang katibayan ng mga nabanggit na kilos ni
Balmond? (Do you have any proof of Balmond’s mentioned acts?)
A.19. Oo, mayroon akong mga larawan ng bakod, nipa hut na itinayo niya at
ang kanyang mga pananim sa aking propriedad. (Yes. I have here photos of
the fence, nipa hut constructed by him and the crops planted by him in my
property.)
Page 6 of 9
A.24. Oo, patuloy akong pinagkaitan ng kita mula sa nasabing pag-aani ng
mga pananim at prutas ng mga puno ng higit o mababa sa P50,000 sa isang
taon. Gayundin, labag sa batas na sumakop si Balmond sa aking lupa nang
hindi nagbabayad ng anumang renta. (Yes, I am continuously deprived of
profits from said harvest of crops and fruits of trees for more or less P50,000
a year. Also, Balmond is unlawfully occupying my land without paying any
rent.)
Page 7 of 9
may kabuuuang halaga na P50,000, sa iyong Judicial Affidavit bilang
mahalagang bahagi nito at markahan ang kapareho ng Exhibit J, sang-
ayon ka ba? (I will attach the receipt of payment from sale of your said
harvested crops from last year, totalling P50,000, in your Judicial Affidavit
as integral part hereof and mark the same as Exhibit J, do you agree?)
A.28. Oo, sang-ayon ako. (Yes, I agree.)
Page 8 of 9
and same amount of P50,000 as a reasonable compensation for the use and
occupation of the said property.)
LAYLA A. SANCHEZ
Affiant
CTC No. 11874190
LAWYER’S ATTESTATION
Doc No. XX
Page No. XX
Book No. XX
Series of 2020.
Page 9 of 9
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
- versus -
Balmond C. Dalanghari,
Defendant.
X-------------------------X
POSITION PAPER
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff, Layla A Sanchez is of legal age, Filipino, married and
presently residing No. 00001 Leopoldo St., Bankers Village, Antipolo
City, Antipolo City ,where the said plaintiff could be served with
summons and other legal processes of this Honorable Office.
On July 31, 2020, plaintiff filed her complaint against the defendants
for forcible entry and damages, the same docketed as Civil Case No. 1234.
It has been in possession of the plaintiff from the time it was acquired
by the former owners since 1997 as shown in Annex 2. Being the rightful
owner, plaintiff has been harvesting the plantings and crops from the subject
property ever since she acquired the same, as evidenced by a picture of
plantings of plaintiff last year and the receipt of payment for the agricultural
Page 2 of 12
products which she harvested and sold on the same year, attached and
marked as Annex 10 and Annex 11, respectively.
ISSUES
1. Whether or not defendants are guilty of forcible entry?
2. Whether the defendants are planters in bad faith?
ARGUMENTS/DISCUSSIONS
3 Heirs of Yusingco, et al. v. Busilak, et al., G.R. No. 210504, Jan. 24. 2018.
Page 3 of 12
Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-66733 registered in her own name,
in the Registry of Deeds in Rizal (herein attached as Annex 1).
3. In fact, plaintiff had long been in prior possession in the concept of
Page 4 of 12
ALLEGATIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF TRO AND
PRELIMINARY MANDATORY INJUNCTION
(a) That the applicant is entitled to the relief demanded , and the whole or part
of such relief consists in restraining the commission or continuance of
the act or acts complained of, or in requiring performance of an act or
acts, either for a limited period or perpetually;
(b) That the commission, continuance or non-performance of the act or acts
complained of during the litigation would probably work injustice to the
applicant; or
Page 5 of 12
(c) That a party, court, agency or a person is doing, threatening, or is
attempting to do, or is procuring or suffering to be done some act or acts
probably in violation of the rights of the applicant respecting the subject
of the action or proceeding, and tending to render the judgment
ineffectual.
4 Toyota Motor Philippines Corporation v. The Court of Appeals et al., G.R. No. 102881 (1992).
Page 6 of 12
15.The unlawful acts of the defendant have caused and still causing
great and irreparable injury to the plaintiff due to the following
reasons:
a. Defendant continues to harvest and/or take the produce, fruits
and benefits from the subject lot to the prejudice of the plaintiff;
b. Defendant, by force, stealth and strategy, has dispossessed and
prevented plaintiff from exercising its authority to develop and
maintain the subject lot;
c. Plaintiff lost and is still losing her privileges and benefits, such
as at the very least being able to receive just rental
compensation for the defendant's unlawful stay in the subject
land.
Page 7 of 12
19.Great and irreparable damages, for reasons stated above, would result
to the plaintiff unless the Honorable Court would issue writ of
preliminary injunction, upon good cause shown.
Page 8 of 12
Under Section 1, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court, a person deprived of the
possession of any land or building by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or
stealth, x x x may, at any time within one (1) year after such unlawful
deprivation or withholding of possession, bring an action in the proper
Municipal Trial Court against the person or persons unlawfully withholding
or depriving of possession, or any person or persons claiming under them,
for the restitution of such possession, together with damages and costs.
PRAYER
Page 9 of 12
2. Ordering the defendant not to make any unlawful act that would
prevent plaintiff from fully exercising management, development and
supervision over said land;
Plaintiff prays for such other and further relief as may be just and
equitable under this premises with costs against defendant.
Layla A Sanchez
Plaintiff
Assisted by:
Zyra Kee
Roll of Attorney No. XXXXX
MCLE Compliance No. XXXXXXX
Telefax No. XXXXXXXXXXX
VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION
Page 10 of 12
I, Layla A Sanchez of legal age and Filipino, and a resident at No.
00001 Leopoldo St., Bankers Village, Antipolo City, Antipolo City after
having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, depose and state THAT:
I have read the same and the contents of which are true and correct of
my own knowledge and/or on the basis of authentic documents;
Should I thereafter learn that a similar action has been filed in any
other courts and or agency, I will undertake to report this fact within
five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Court.
All the allegations contained therein are true and correct to the best of
our knowledge.
Layla A. Sanchez
Plaintiff
Page 11 of 12
ATTY. NANA A. ESTES
Notary Public
Page 12 of 12
Republic of the Philippines
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT
MORONG, RIZAL
Layla A. Sanchez,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL CASE NO. 1234
FOR: EJECTMENT AS A
- versus - RESULT OF FORCIBLE ENTRY
WITH PRAYER FOR
WRIT OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
Balmond C. Dalanghari,
and all persons claiming
rights under them,
Defendant.
X-------------------------X
All other reliefs as are just and equitable are likewise prayed for.
Copy/ies furnished:
Atty. Aleezah Regado
ZGR Law Firm
8 Rockwell, Makati City
Page 2 of 3
REQUEST OF AND NOTICE OF HEARING
Page 3 of 3