Scribd
Upload
50 views4 pages

Comment To MR

The respondents filed a Comment/Opposition to the Motion for Reconsideration regarding a case of Estafa through Falsification of Public Document. They argue that [1] the complainants' allegations are mere repetitions that were already denied and substantiated with evidence; [2] respondents did not falsify any documents as the share of one party was transferred prior to his death according to notarized documents; and [3] complainants have no valid claim and were aware of the true circumstances, suggesting this is a malicious complaint intended to harass the respondents. They request the motion be denied to uphold the previous dismissal.

Uploaded by

Saan Law Office
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
50 views4 pages

Comment To MR

The respondents filed a Comment/Opposition to the Motion for Reconsideration regarding a case of Estafa through Falsification of Public Document. They argue that [1] the complainants' allegations are mere repetitions that were already denied and substantiated with evidence; [2] respondents did not falsify any documents as the share of one party was transferred prior to his death according to notarized documents; and [3] complainants have no valid claim and were aware of the true circumstances, suggesting this is a malicious complaint intended to harass the respondents. They request the motion be denied to uphold the previous dismissal.

Uploaded by

Saan Law Office
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Republic of the Philippines 

Department of Justice 
NATIONAL PROSECUTION OFFICCE 
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR 
Old City Hall Building 
Centro 03, Tuguegarao City Cagayan 
 
BENITO PATTUGALAN, et al, 
       Complainants,     II-03-INV-022F-00550 
 
-versus- For:  Estafa Through
Falsification of Public
Document 
JOSEFA LANGUIAN, et al, 
      Respondents. 
 
x------------------------------------x 
 
COMMENT/OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION 
 
Unto this Honorable Office, respondents, through the undersigned
counsel, most respectfully states, THAT: 
 
“One who alleges a fact has the burden of proving it, since mere
allegation is not evidence,” Equally, it is a basic rule in evidence
that “he who alleges must prove his case or claim by degree of
evidence required”1

1. On 03 October 2022, respondents received a copy of the


Motion for Reconsideration dated 19 September 2022 alleging that
a case of Estafa through Falsification of Public Document should
be filed, there being probable cause against herein respondents; 
 
2. The respondents humbly but strongly oppose the allegations
filed by the Complainants on the following grounds: 
 
a. THE AVERMENTS CONTAINED THEREIN ARE MERE
REITERATIONS OF THE EARLIER ISSUES STATED IN
THEIR COMPLAINT WHICH WE ALREADY DENIED AND
SUBSTANTIATED WITH DOCUMENTARY EXHIBITS IN OUR
COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT; 
 
b. As explained, herein respondents neither falsify any
document nor omitted Manuel Pattugalan because his share
was already transferred and/or disposed prior to his death; 

c. To refresh, a notarized document docketed as Doc. No.


711, Page No. 46, Book No. V Series of 1973 showed that the
1
Sps. NILO RAMOS and ELIADORA RAMOS, vs. RAUL OBISPO and FAR EAST BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, G.R. No. 193804, February 27,
2013
share of Manuel Pattugalan was sold and divided equally
between Socorro and herein respondent, Josefa. These
transpired during their lifetime. Therefore and as we are
reiterating, the complainants have no share to speak of;

d. Socorro Pattugalan-Suyu was likewise not omitted


because she signed the contested instrument; 
  
e. Respondents Gregoria Darilag and Ronie Darilag were
sent a copy of the Joint Reply-Affidavit when truth and in fact,
they were not impleaded in the earlier complaint filed;

f. Herein respondents do not feign ignorance on the


execution of the alleged falsified document, nor are they
generally denying the same because there was no falsification
employed at the very least. As extensively discussed in our
counter-affidavit, the elements of the crime charged are
wanting when we executed the Extrajudicial Settlement of
Estate . The complainants espoused their claim on self-serving
grounds of omission of the name of their father Manuel
Pattugalan alone, but failed miserably to duly substantiate their
claim;

3. To even substantiate herein respondents’ claim that Manuel


Pattugalan indeed sold his property, we have hereunto attached the
Affidavits of ___________________2 and __________________3;

4. To rest our points, herein complainants were always aware of the


truth that transpired among our family members prior these years,
hence our continuous possession were never disturbed until this
malicious and groundless complaint has been filed.
 
Henceforth, we respectfully therefore beg the Honorable Public
Prosecutor to fairly examine and delve impartially on the evidence
presented; 
 
“The great goal of our criminal law procedure is not to send
people to the goal but to do justice especially to the innocent. 4“. 
 
Given the obvious insufficiency of the evidence presented against
us, which was only made particularly to harass us, we humbly and
respectfully request the Honorable Prosecutor to uphold the resolution
dated 24 August 2022 in dismissing the complaint; 
We are executing the foregoing instrument to attest the foregoing
facts and circumstances and to refute the allegations against us in the
Complaint.

2
See Annex “A”
3
See Annex “B”
4
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, vs. CESAR GALVEZ, G.R. No. 157221 March 30, 2007
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this

_________________ at Tuguegarao City, Cagayan. 


 
AFFIANTS FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT. 

 
JOSEFA LANGUIAN
  

ESTRELLA I. QUILANG 
 
 
   RODOLFO I. IQUIN 
 
 
   SUSANA CONSTANTINO 
 
 
   EDUARDO IQUIN 
 
 
   GERONIMO DARILAG 
 
 
   CESAR DARILAG  
   Respondents/Affiants 

Copy Furnished: 
 
Benito Pattugalan 
Larion Alto, Tuguegarao City, Cagayan 
 
 
Mariano Tirso Pattugalan 
Larion Alto, Tuguegarao City, Cagayan
 
 
VERIFICATION

WE, JOSEFA LANGUIAN, ESTRELLA I. QUILANG, RODOLFO


I. IQUIN, SUSANA CONSTANTINO, EDUARDO IQUIN, GERONIMO
DARILAG and CESAR DARILAG, of legal age, Filipino citizens, married
and residents of Larion Alto, Tuguegarao City Cagayan after having
been duly sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby depose and say
THAT:

We are the complainants in the above-captioned case; we caused


the preparation and filing of the foregoing Motion for Reconsideration;the
allegations contained therein are true and correct to the best of our
personal knowledge and based on authentic documents.

AFFIANTS FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT


 

JOSEFA LANGUIAN
ID No:

  ESTRELLA I. QUILANG 
ID No:
 
 
   RODOLFO I. IQUIN 
  ID No:
 
   SUSANA CONSTANTINO 
  ID No:
 
   EDUARDO IQUIN 
 ID No:
 
   GERONIMO DARILAG 
 ID No:
 
   CESAR DARILAG  
 ID No:

   Respondents/Affiants 

SUBSRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____ day of October


2022 at Tuguegarao City, Cagayan, affiants exhibiting to me their
respective Identification Cards as indicated above.

Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of 2022.

 
 

You might also like