Answer - Pleading

Republic of the Philippines
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

Municipality of Maaliwas Norte, Branch 143
Province of Gotham
ANTONIO R. TUWID-LANDAS,
Petitioner,
Case No. ____________
- VS – For: Quo Warranto
ROLANDO L. CUPIT,
Respondent.
X -------------------------------------------- X
ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM
COMES NOW, RESPONDENT, ROLANDO L. CUPIT, by the

undersigned counsel unto this Honorable Court in Answer to the Quo
Warranto Complaint, most respectfully states that:
1. Respondent denies the allegations in paragraphs 1 and 6 of the
complaint with regard to the personal circumstances of the petitioner. The
truth of the matter is that the petitioner has no legal capacity to file the
case being that the petitioner, Antonio R. Tuwid-Landas, is NOT a
registered voter at precinct 34-A in Barangay Tahimik, Maaliwalas
Norte;
1.1 Attached to this is a certification by the Comelec Officer for
the Municipality of Maaliwas Norte Province of Gotham that states that
Petitioner is not a registered voter for such Municipality, ANNEX A;
2. Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 2 of the
complaint with respect to the personal circumstances of the respondent;
3. Respondent denies the allegation in paragraph 5 of the complaint
that such petition was filed within the 10-day period set-out in Section
253 of the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Bilang 881). The truth of the
matter is that the petition was received on November 12,2013. Thus, it
was filed beyond the 10-day period. A copy of the service is attached,
ANNEX B;
1
4. Respondent admits the antecedent facts in paragraphs 7 and 8 of
the complaint with respect to the conduct of the elections and the results
thereof. In addition, the Respondent admits to the stipulation that he was
proclaimed by the Board of Canvassers as Punong-Barangay with no
disqualification case nor election contest filed by any party;
5. Respondent denies paragraphs 10 and 11 of the complaint with
regard to the fact that respondent was not dismissed from his position as
Sangguniang Kabataan Chair in 2003. The truth of the matter is
mentioned in the SPECIAL and AFFIRMATIVE defenses of the answer;
6. Respondent denies paragraph 12 of the complaint being that the
respondent does not possess any disqualification, which bars him from
running for any elective local position;
SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

7. Respondent admits the allegation in paragraph 10 of the
complaint with respect to the fact that the DILG issued a Certified True
Copy of the DILG Resolution however denies the dismissal of the
Respondent from his position as Sangguniang Kabataan Chair in 2003.
The truth of the matter is that an appeal was filed by Rolando Cupit with
the Court of appeals. The Court of appeals rendered a decision reversing
the dismissal of Rolando Cupit. Thus, there was no previous dismissal
from his position;
7.1 Attached to this answer is a certified true copy of the
judgment of the CA dated March 4, 2004 that has become Final and
Executory; ANNEX C;
8. The complaint does not state a valid and genuine cause of action
against the Respondent being that there was no previous disqualification.
Thus, there is no ground for the argument on paragraph 10;
9. The petitioner has no legal standing to bring the case to the court
being that he is not a legitimate voter in the municipality of Maaliwas
Norte;
COUNTERCLAIM
10. By reason of plaintiff’s malicious and baseless complaint,
Respondent’s good name and reputation was besmirched and he should
be awarded damages in the amount of no less than fifty Thousand Pesos
(Php50,000.00) Philippine currency;
2
10.1 Numerous reports in the local newspaper about the complaint
filed against Rolando Cupit were published causing the respondent’s
name and good reputation to be tarnished;
11. By reason further of the filing of this baseless complaint,
Respondent sustained moral damages. The complaint not only
besmirched his and his family’s reputation, it also caused him anxiety,
mental anguish and sleepless nights. The respondent ask the he be
awarded for such moral damages in the amount of no less than fifty
Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00) Philippine currency;
11.1 Respondent has noted that because of the baseless complaint
filed against him, he was miserable and was also dishearted to perform
his functions;
12.To protect Respondent’s right, he was compelled to engage the
services of counsel in the sum of fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00)
Philippine Currency, by way of Attorney’s fees plus P5,000.00 per
appearance honorarium;
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed unto this Honorable Court
that after due hearing judgment be rendered against plaintiff and in favor
of Respondent, as follows:
1. Ordering the dismissal of the complaint due to lack of cause
of action and lack of legal standing of the petitioner;
2. Ordering plaintiff to pay Respondent Php50,000.00 as by
way of moral damages;
3. Ordering plaintiff to pay Respondent Php50,000.00 as by
way of actual damages;
4. Ordering plaintiff to pay Respondent Php50,000.00 by way
of a attorney’s fees plus P5,000.00 per court appearance
honorarium;
5. To pay the cost of suit.
All other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.
3
Municipality of Maaliwas Norte, 1st day of May,2014.
EDGAR SEAN V. GALVEZ

COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT
PTR No. 05-1589/05.15.89/Maganda City
IBP Lifetime No. 051589/Maganda City
Roll No. 051589
#6 Apple Street, Kapitolyo, Maganda City, Diyosa
Tel No. 612-9872 to 04\Fax No. 987-6500
seangalvez@gmail.com
VERIFICATION
I, ROLANDO L. CUPIT, of legal age, Filipino, under oath, do

hereby verify and certify, to wit:
1.That I am the Respondent in the above-entitled case; That I

caused the preparations of the foregoing Answer with Counterclaim; That
the contents thereof are true and correct of my own personal knowledge,
information and authentic records;
2.That I have not commenced any action against the plaintiff

before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any other court,
agency or tribunal. If I find another case, I shall undertake to make
known to this Honorable Court within five (5) days from knowledge
thereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 30th

day of April 2014 at Pasig City.
ROLANDO L. CUPIT,
Affiant
4
Doc. No._____;
Page No._____;
Book No._____;
Series of 2014
Copy Furnished;
KARLO G. NOCHE
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
# 99 Fox Street, Kapitolyo,
Maaliwalas Sur City, Maaliwalas Sur

Answer - Pleading

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Answer - Pleading

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Answer - Pleading

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIM

COMES NOW, RESPONDENT, ROLANDO L. CUPIT, by the

SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

EDGAR SEAN V. GALVEZ

I, ROLANDO L. CUPIT, of legal age, Filipino, under oath, do

1.That I am the Respondent in the above-entitled case; That I

2.That I have not commenced any action against the plaintiff

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 30th

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.