Pleading

Republic of the Philippines
Regional Trial Court

National Capital Judicial Region
Pasig City
Branch __
Moises Mendoza, Civil Case No.: _____

Plaintiff;
- versus -
Wenver Garcia and For: Collection of Sum of

Ursula Dela Rosa, Money with Damages
Defendants.
x—----------------------------------------x
COMPLAINT
With utmost respect unto this Honorable Court, PLAINTIFF, most

respectfully alleges the following:
A. PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Moises Mendoza (“Plaintiff”) is a Filipino citizen, of

legal age, and a resident of No. 99 Barangay Alexir, Pasig City,
Philippines;
2. Defendant Wenver Garcia (“Defendant”) is a Filipino citizen,

of legal age and a resident of No. 77 Barangay Agnes, San
Fernando, La Union;
3. Defendant Ursula Dela Rosa (“Defendant”) is a Filipino

citizen, of legal age and a resident of No. 44 Barangay
Umingan Tabora, Lucena City, Quezon;
4. Both parties have the capacity to sue and be sued;
B. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION PRECEDENT
5. The parties did not undergo the Barangay Conciliation process

as it falls within the exception stated under Section 408 (f) of
the Local Government Code, to wit;
(f) Disputes involving parties who actually reside in
Barangays of different cities or municipalities, except
where such Barangay units adjoin each other and the
parties thereto agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
C. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
6. On November 9, 2019, Plaintiff entered into a contract of

mutuum with the Defendants amounting to Two Million Five
Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php 2,500,000.00) with monthly
interest of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00);
7. In recognition of Defendants’ obligation in favor of the

Plaintiff, the Defendants executed a Promissory Note on
November 9, 2019, a copy of which is hereto attached as
Annex “A” and made an integral part of this Complaint;
8. As shown in the attached promissory note, Defendants’

obligation is due and demandable on November 9, 2020
entitling the Plaintiff to the payment of the principal amount of
Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php 2,500,000.00)
including monthly interest of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php
50,000.00);
9. When the obligation became due and demandable, no payment

was made to the Plaintiff;
10.The Plaintiff, through counsel, sent three demand letters to each

defendant dated November 10, 2020, December 10, 2020, and
January 10, 2021, respectively. A copy of each of the demand
letters is attached hereto as Annexes “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, “F”,
and “G”, respectively, and made an integral part of this
Complaint;
11.Despite the receipt of the three (3) demand letters, the

Defendants still failed, neglected, and refused to pay their
obligations without lawful and justifiable cause.
D. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Plaintiff repleads the above-stated allegations in support of the second

cause of action, and in addition alleges the following:
12.By reason of the Defendant’s unreasonable failure or refusal to

pay their due and demandable obligation, Plaintiff was forced
2
to engage the services of counsel to vindicate his rights thereby
committing himself to pay lawyer’s acceptance fees amounting
to FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P 50,000.00) and an
appearance fee of THREE THOUSAND PESOS (P 3,000.00)
per hearing as evidenced by original copies of the Official
Receipts attached hereto as Annex “H” and “I”.
13.Plaintiff suffered moral damages amounting to THIRTY

THOUSAND PESOS (P 30,000.00) due to sleepless nights,
wounded feelings, and mental anguish as the proximate result
of the unjustified and intentional refusal to recover a reasonable
amount of moral damages left to the good discretion of this
Honorable Court.
14.By reason of Defendant’s violation and disregard of Plaintiff’s

rights, the award of exemplary damages in the amount of
FIFTEEN THOUSAND PESOS (P 15,000.00) warrants to
serve as a deterrent to the commission by the Defendants and to
others similarly-minded of similar acts in the future
E. RELEVANT LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE
15. Article 1156 of the New Civil Code provides that an obligation
is a juridical necessity to give to do or not to do. Under Article
1157 of the same code, it further enumerates the sources of
obligation which includes contracts. Contract as defined under
Article 1305, is a meeting of minds between two persons
whereby one binds himself with respect to the other to give
something or to render some service.
Consequently, Article 1318 bring forth that there is no contract

unless the following requisites concur:
(1) Consent of the contracting parties;
(2) Object certain which is the subject matter of the
contract;
(3) Cause of the obligation which is established.
All elements should be present in a contract; otherwise, it
cannot be perfected.
16. Moreover, Articles 1933 and 1953 of the Civil Code provide
the guideposts that determine if a contractual relation is one of
simple loan or mutuum:
“Art. 1933. By the contract of loan, one of the

parties delivers to another, either something not
consumable so that the latter may use the same for
3
a certain time and return it, in which case the
contract is called a commodatum; or money or
other consumable thing, upon the condition that
the same amount of the same kind and quality shall
be paid, in which case the contract is simply called
a loan or mutuum”.
“Art. 1953. A person who receives a loan of

money or any other fungible thing acquires the
ownership thereof, and is bound to pay to the
creditor an equal amount of the same kind and
quality”.
“When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing,

it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and
there can be no evidence of such terms other than the contents
of the written agreement between the parties and their
successors in interest.”
17. Furthermore, in the case of Philippine National Bank vs. Cua,

G.R. No. 199161, April 18, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that
a promissory note is the best evidence of the existence of the
loan. It further states that “A promissory note is a solemn
acknowledgment of a debt and a formal commitment to repay it
on the date and under the conditions agreed upon by the
borrower and the lender. A person who signs such an
instrument is bound to honor it as a legitimate obligation duly
assumed by him through the signature he affixes thereto as a
token of his good faith. If he reneges on his promise without
cause, he forfeits the sympathy and assistance of this Court and
deserves instead its sharp repudiation. The promissory note is
the best evidence to prove the existence of the loan”.
18. With respect to attorney’s fees and other costs, Article 2208 of
the New Civil Code of the Philippines states the policy that
should guide the courts when awarding attorney’s fees to a
litigant. As a general rule, the parties may stipulate the recovery
of attorney’s fees. But in the absence of such stipulation, in
Alcatel Philippines, Inc. v. I. M. Bongar & Co., Inc., G.R. No.
182946, October 5, 2011, the Court explained that:
"Although attorney’s fees are not allowed in the

absence of stipulation, the court can award the same
when the defendant’s act or omission has compelled
the plaintiff to incur expenses to protect his interest
or where the defendant acted in gross and evident
4
bad faith in refusing to satisfy the plaintiff’s plainly
valid, just and demandable claim."
19. With regard to the legal interest, Article 2209 of the New Civil
Code provides that if the obligation consists in the payment of a
sum of money, and the debtor incurs in delay, the indemnity for
damages, there being no stipulation to the contrary, shall be the
payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the absence of
stipulation, the legal interest, which is six per cent per annum.
20. With regard to moral damages, Article 2217 of the Civil Code
of the Philippines defines moral damages as "physical suffering,
mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation,
wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar
injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation, moral
damages may be recovered if they are the proximate result of
the defendant's wrongful act for omission."
In addition, Art. 1170 of the Civil Code provides that those who
in the performance of their obligations are guilty of fraud,
negligence, or delay, and those who in any manner contravene
the tenor thereof are liable for damages.
In the case of Pineda vs. De Vega, G.R. No. 233774, April 10,
2019, the Court stated that:
“Default or mora, which is a kind of voluntary breach

of an obligation, signifies the idea of delay in the
fulfillment of an obligation with respect to time.
Whether the demand is judicial or extrajudicial, if
the obligor or debtor fails to fulfill or perform his
obligations, like payment of a loan, as in this case,
he is in mora solvendi, and, thus, liable for
damages.”
21.Exemplary damages may also be awarded in contracts and

quasi-contracts as enunciated in the case of Sulpicio Lines, Inc.
v. Sesante et. al, 791 Phil. 409 (2016), the Court has the
discretion to award exemplary damages if the defendant acted
in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent
manner. Indeed, exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a
matter of right, and it is left to the court to decide whether or
not to award them.
The Civil Code provides for the rules concerning the award of
exemplary damages, as follows:
5
“Article. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages
are imposed, by way of example or correction for
the public good, in addition to the moral,
temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
Article. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the

court may award exemplary damages if the
defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless,
oppressive, or malevolent manner.
Article. 2233. Exemplary damages cannot be

recovered as a matter of right; the court will decide
whether or not they should be adjudicated”.
F. DOCUMENTARY AND OBJECT EXHIBITS
Plaintiff hereby attaches the following documentary and object

evidence to support the allegations:
I. The Promissory Note attached hereto as Annex “A”

II. The First Demand Letter sent to Wenver Garcia and Ursula
Dela Rosa, attached herein as Annex “B” and “C”,
respectively.
III. The Second Demand Letter sent to Wenver Garcia and Ursula
Dela Rosa, attached herein as Annex “D” and “E”,
respectively.
IV. The Final Demand Letter sent to Wenver Garcia and Ursula
Dela Rosa, attached herein as Annex “F” and “G”,
respectively.
V. The Engagement letter which contains the stipulation for the
Lawyer’s Acceptance Fee and Appearance Fee, attached herein
as Annex “H”.
VI. Judicial Affidavit of the Plaintiff, attached herein as Annex
“K”.
G. WITNESSES
22. In compliance with Section 6, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court, as

amended by A.M No. 19-10-20-SC (2019 Amendments to the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure), the following witnesses whose
Judicial Affidavits are attached, will testify as follows:
a. Mother Mary Forever - she will testify on the

circumstances surrounding the plaintiff’s cause of action.
In the process, she will identify exhibits for the plaintiff.
6
The purposes for which her testimony is offered is
identified in her Judicial Affidavit herein attached as
Annex “I”.
b. Reigna Ng Kagandahan - she will testify on the

circumstances surrounding the plaintiff’s cause of action.
In the process, she will identify exhibits for the plaintiff.
The purposes for which her testimony is offered is
identified in her Judicial Affidavit herein attached as
Annex “J”.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court to

render judgment as follows:
1. ORDERING the DEFENDANTS to PAY the PLAINTIFF

the following:
a. The amount of TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED
THOUSAND PESOS (Php 2,500,000.00) representing
the unpaid principal obligation as indicated in the duly
executed promissory note; and
b. The amount of SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS
(Php 600,000.00) representing the accumulated Php
50,000.00 monthly interest as indicated in the duly
executed Promissory Note.
2. ORDERING the Defendants to pay Plaintiff the following:

a. Legal interest at 6% per annum from the date of default
on January 21, 2022;
b. The amount of THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS (Php
30,000.00) as moral damages;
c. The amount of FIFTEEN THOUSAND PESOS (Php
15,000.00) as exemplary damages; and
d. The litigation expenses and costs for the filing of the
instant suit actually spent by the Plaintiff.
3. Other reliefs, just and equitable, under the circumstance are

likewise prayed of this Honorable Court.
It is respectfully submitted.
At the City of Pasig, Philippines, this 15th day of September 2022.
ANDRES AND ASSOCIATES
7
#1 Bonifacio Street, Baguio City, Benguet
Cell Phone Number: 091234567891
Telephone number: 2121932212
Counsel for Plaintiff
BY:
ATTY. APRYLL BULINTAO

PTR NO: 1234567/1-04-22/Baguio City
IBP Lifetime No: 00111
Roll of Attorneys No: 729019
MCLE Compliance No. II – 0001231; 02-15-2020
8
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
CITY OF PASIG ) S.S.
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM

SHOPPING
I, MOISES MENDOZA, of legal age, Filipino, and a resident of 99

Barangay Alexir, Pasig City after having been duly sworn to in accordance
with law, do hereby depose and state that:
1) I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled case;
2) I have personally caused the preparation of the foregoing

complaint;
3) I have read and understood the foregoing compliant and the

contents herein and hereby declare that the same are true and
correct based on my personal knowledge and /or based on the
authentic records at hand;
4) I attest to the authenticity of the annexes thereof:

a) That all allegations herein are true and correct of my
own knowledge and based on authentic documents;
b) That the pleading is not filed to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, needlessly increase the cost of
litigation; and
c) The factual allegations herein have evidentiary support
or, if specifically, so identified, will likewise have
evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for
discovery.
5) I have not commenced any other court action or proceeding

involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency. To the best of my
knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or
agency.
6) Should I thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding

has been pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I hereby undertake to
report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court or
agency wherein the original pleading and sworn certification
contemplated herein have been filed.
9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature
this 15th day of September 2022 at the City of Pasig, Philippines
MOISES MENDOZA
Affiant
PRC License No. 019166; Pasig City
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, a notary for and in the

City of Pasig this 15th day of September 2022. I hereby CERTIFY that I
have personally examined the affiant, who presented his competent proof of
identity as indicated below his name, and I am satisfied that she executed the
foregoing document freely and voluntarily based on his personal knowledge
and authentic papers, documents, and/or records.
WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL on the date and place

above indicated.
YOONGI MIN
Notary Public for the City of Pasig
Until December 31, 2023
PTR NO. 76583911; 01.04.22;Pasig City
LIFETIME IBP NO. 123456
Roll No. 10101
TIN No. 915-123-456
MCLE Compliance No. IV – 0001234; 02-15-2020
0919811011
yoongimin@accramlaw.com
Doc No. 121

Page No. 12
Book No. 3
Series of 2022.
10
Annex “A”
11
12
Annex “B”
10 November 2020
WENVER GARCIA
No. 77 Barangay Angeles,
San Fernando, La Union
Dear Mr. Garcia:
We write on behalf of our client, Moises Mendoza, the matter of your non-payment of
your obligation.
Records disclose that you have an outstanding obligation with our client in the amount of
Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php 2,500,000.00) with monthly interest
amounting to Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00). Despite repeated oral demands, you
failed and continuously failed to pay the aforesaid amount.
Accordingly, DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of

Php2,500,000.00 within FIFTEEN (15) days from receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we
will be constrained to file the necessary legal action against you to protect the interest of
our client.
We trust that you will give this matter your prompt and preferential attention to avoid the
expense and inconvenience of litigation.
Truly yours,
ATTY. SAMANTHA BAY-AN
Received: Wenver Garcia (10 November 2020)
13
Annex “C”
10 November 2020
URSULA DELA ROSA

No. 44 Barangay Umingan Tabora,
Lucena City, Quezon
Dear Miss Dela Rosa:
your obligation.
Accordingly, DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of

Php2,500,000.00 within FIFTEEN (15) days from receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we
will be constrained to file the necessary legal action against you to protect the interest of
our client.
Truly yours,
Received: Ursula Dela Rosa (10 November 2020)
14
Annex “D”
10 December 2020
WENVER GARCIA
Dear Mr. Garcia:
your obligation.
Accordingly, this SECOND DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of
Php2,500,000.00 within TEN (10) days from receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we will be
constrained to file the necessary legal action against you to protect the interest of our
client.
Truly yours,
Received: Wenver Garcia (10 December 2020)
15
Annex “E”
10 December 2020
URSULA DELA ROSA

Lucena City, Quezon
your obligation.
Accordingly, this SECOND DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of
Php2,500,000.00 within TEN (10) days from receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we will be
client.
Truly yours,
Received: Ursula Dela Rosa (10 December 2020)
16
Annex “F”
10 January 2021
WENVER GARCIA
Dear Mr. Garcia:
your obligation.
Accordingly, FINAL DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of
Php2,500,000.00 within FIVE (5) days from receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we will be
client.
Truly yours,
Received: Wenver Garcia (10 January 2021)
17
Annex “G”
10 January 2021
URSULA DELA ROSA

Lucena City, Quezon
your obligation.
Accordingly, FINAL DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of
Php2,500,000.00 within FIVE (5) days from receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we will be
client.
Truly yours,
Received: Ursula Dela Rosa (10 January 2021)
18
Annex “H”
ENGAGEMENT CONTRACT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS
This contract is entered into this 9th day of September 2022, Baguio City, Philippines, by
and between:
Andres and Associates Law Office, a law office duly organized under Philippine laws
with office address at #1 Bonifacio Street, Baguio City, hereinafter referred to as the
FIRST PARTY; and
Moises Mendoza, Filipino, of legal age, and a resident of No. 99 Barangay Alexir, Pasig
City, Philippines, and hereinafter referred to as the SECOND PARTY.
Witnesseth:
1. The SECOND PARTY is the creditor in a promissory note dated November 9,

2019;
2. The SECOND PARTY intends to file a case for collection of sum money in
relation to the said promissory note; and
3. The FIRST PARTY has agreed to represent the SECOND PARTY in such a case,
subject to the payment of an acceptance fee of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS
(P50,000.00) and appearance fees of THREE THOUSAND PESOS per hearing.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Engagement Contract in the
City of Baguio, as of the date first above written.
Signed by:
Atty. Apryll Bulintao Moises Mendoza
Witness
Mother Mary Forever Reigna ng Kagandahan
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

Baguio City ) S.S.
BEFORE ME, a Notary Public in and for Baguio City on this 9th day of September,
2022 personally appeared the following:
Name ID Type/Number Date/Place of Issue

Atty. Apryll Bulintao 123456789 Baguio City
Moises Mendoza 97654321 Pasig City
19
known to me to be the same persons who executed the foregoing Agreement consisting of
two (2) pages, including this page, and they acknowledged to me that the same is their
free and voluntary act and deed, as well as that of the party he/she represents.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 9th day of
September, 2022 in the City of Baguio.
Atty. Aeron Sean Nesperos

Notary Public
Doc No.: 120

Page No.: 14
Book No.: 3
Series of 2022.
20
Annex “I”
Pasig City
Branch __

Plaintiff;
- versus -

Defendants.
x—----------------------------------------x
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF MOTHER MARY FOREVER
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Examination of the witness was done in English, a language known to

her:
I, MOTHER MARY FOREVER, of legal age, Filipino, a

resident of Angeles City, a witness of the instant case, fully
aware that I am executing the foregoing judicial affidavit fully
conscious, under oath and under pain of perjury, in question-
and-answer format, consistent with A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC,
otherwise known as the Judicial Affidavit Rule.
I am presently under the direct-examination of Atty.

Apryll Bulintao, of 3/F Room V308, Msgr. Charles Vath
Library Bldg., Saint Louis University, A. Bonifacio Street,
2600 Baguio City Philippines. The examination is being held at
the same address.
OFFER OF TESTIMONY
In lieu of the oral testimony in court of Mother Mary Forever, his

Judicial Affidavit is being offered pursuant to A.M. 12-8-8-SC, known as
the Judicial Affidavit Rule, to prove that the Defendants, Wenver Garcia and
Ursula Dela Rosa, received the principal amount totaling to Two Million
Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php2,500,000.00) from Moises Mendoza, to
21
prove that despite demands for payment, defendants continuously failed and
refused to pay the amount of the loan, to prove that plaintiff is entitled to
moral and exemplary damages due to the suffering caused by defendants’
refusal to pay the amount of the loan.
DIRECT TESTIMONY
Q1: Do you swear to tell nothing but the truth and that any
untruthful statement you herein make may subject you to
criminal liability?
A1: Yes, I do.
Q2: Do you know the Plaintiff in this case Moises Mendoza?

A2: Yes. He is my neighbor.
Q3: How long have you been neighbors with the Plaintiff?
A3: He has been my neighbor for almost seven (7) years
already.
Q4: Do you know the Defendants in this case Wenver Garcia

and Ursula Dela Rosa?
A4: Yes, I have seen them before and they frequently visited
Moises Mendoza at his place in Angeles City.
Q5: Do you have any knowledge of the reason why they

frequently visited the Plaintiff’s residence?
A5: Yes. There was this one instance on November 9, 2019,
while I was watering my plants in my garden, I overheard the
Defendants begging the Plaintiff to lend them a huge amount of
money.
Q6: Do you have any knowledge of the reason why Wenver

Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa were asking the Plaintiff to lend
them money?
A6: I heard that the Defendants wanted to start a business but
did not have enough money to start their own business.
Q7: What transpired after?

A7: After around 10 minutes, they went out and I saw the
Plaintiff handing over a huge suitcase to the Defendants and
when the latter opened it, there was lots of money inside.
Q8: Please continue the narration.

A8: They executed a promissory note and I was made to be
signed as one of the witnesses.
22
Q9: I am now showing you this Promissory Note marked as
Annex “A” in this complaint executed on November 9, 2019
between Moises Mendoza, as creditor and Wenver Garcia and
Ursula Dela Rosa as the debtor. Is this the same Promissory
Note you were pertaining to and which you were made to sign
as a witness?
A9: Yes. That is the same Promissory Note.
- End of Statement -
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

Baguio City , 9th day of September 2022
MM Forever
Mother Mary Forever
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, a notary public in

and for the City of Baguio this 9th day of September 2022, affiant personally
came and with her Passport ID 12345, bearing her photograph and signature,
known to me as the same person who personally signed the foregoing
instrument before me and avowed under penalty of law to the whole truth of
the contents of said instrument.
APRYLL BULINTAO
Notary Public
PTR NO:
1234567/1-04-22/Baguio City
MCLE Compliance No. II –
0001231; 02-15-2020
Doc No.: 125

Page No.: 14
Book No.: 3
Series of 2022.
23
SWORN ATTESTATION OF THE LAWYER WHO CONDUCTED
OR SUPERVISED THE EXAMINATION OF THE WITNESS
The undersigned Atty. Apryll Bulintao, under oath, deposes and states
that:
1. She is the Legal Counsel for the plaintiff in the above-
entitled case;
2. She faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the
questions asked and the corresponding answers given by the
above-named witness;
3. Neither she nor any other person, then present or assisting
her coached the witness regarding the latter’s answers; and
4. She conducted the examination of the witness at the Office of
Atty. Apryll Bulintao, Baguio City.
Further affiant sayeth naught.

Baguio City, 9th day of September 2022.
Atty. Apryll Bulintao

Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 9th day of

September 2022 at Baguio City, Philippines.

Notary Public
PTR NO:
12344567/1-04-22/Baguio City
0001231; 02-15-2022
Doc No.: 126

Page No.: 15
Book No.: 3
Series of 2022.
24
Annex “J”
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Pasig City, Branch No.___

Plaintiff;
- versus -

Defendants.
x—----------------------------------------x
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF REIGNA NG KAGANDAHAN

I, REIGNA NG KAGANDAHAN, Filipino, single, of legal age, with
residence at Angeles City, after having been duly sworn in accordance with
law, hereby depose and state:
The person examining me is Atty. Apryll Bulintao with address at
3/F Room V308, Msgr. Charles Vath Library Bldg., Saint Louis
University, A. Bonifacio Street, 2600, Baguio City Philippines.The
examination is being held at the same address.
I am answering his questions fully conscious that I do so under

oath and may face criminal liability for false testimony and perjury.
AFFIDAVIT PROPER
Q1: Do you swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth?
A:Yes Attorney.
Q2: Please state your name and other personal circumstances for the
record.
A: I am Reigna ng Kagandahan, Filipino, single and a resident of
Angeles City.
Q3: Do you know Moises Mendoza?

A: Yes.
25
Q4: How about Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa?
A: Yes, I know Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa.
Q5: I am showing you this Promissory Note dated November 9, 2019

marked as Annex “_” in the complaint, which was executed between
Moises Medoza, creditor and Ursula Dela Rosa and Wenver Garcia,
debtor, are you familiar with this?
A: Yes.
Q6: Do you remember signing the document as witness to the

promissory note?
A: Yes.
Q7: Did you personally affix your signature on the promissory note?
A: Yes.
Q7: In the promissory note, the amount borrowed by Wenver Garcia

and Ursula Dela Rosa is Php2,500,000, is this correct?
A: Yes.
Q8: Did the parties agree on a stipulation of a monthly interest of

Php50,000?
A: Yes.
Q9: Did you see the parties personally sign the promissory note?
A: Yes, I personally saw Moises Mendoza, Wenver Garcia, and
Ursula Dela Rosa affix their signatures on the promissory note.
Q10: Are there any irregularities with the promissory note?

A: I don’t see any irregularities with the promissory note.

Baguio City, Sep 9, 2022.
ReignaNK
REIGNA NG KAGANDAHAN
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me in the City on this 9th day of

September 2022, affiant exhibiting before me his/her Driver’s license with
ID no. 1234f657, issued on February 22, 2021 at Angeles City bearing her
photograph and signature, known to me as the same person who personally
signed the foregoing instrument before me and avowed under penalty of law
to the whole truth of the contents of said instrument.
26
[Atty. Apryll Bulintao
NOTARY PUBLIC

I, Atty. Apryll Bulintao, after having been sworn to in accordance

with the law do hereby depose and say that:
1. I am the legal counsel for the plaintiff in the above-entitled case;
2. I have faithfully recorded the questions I asked and the corresponding
answers that witness, Reigna Ng Kagandahan, gave;
3. I fully understand that any false attention shall subject me to
disciplinary action, including disbarment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this 9th

day of September 2022.

Counsel for Plaintiff
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 9th day of September 2022

at Baguio City, Philippines.
Atty. Aeron Sean Nisperos

NOTARY PUBLIC
0001231; 02-15-2022
Doc No.: 127
Page No.: 15
Book No.: 3
Series of 2022.
27
Annex “K”
Pasig City
Branch __

Plaintiff;
- versus -

Defendants.
x—----------------------------------------x
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF MOISES MENDOZA
Examination of the plaintiff was done in English, a language known to

her:
I, MOISES MENDOZA, Filipino citizen, of legal age,

and a resident of No. 99 Barangay Alexir, Pasig City,
Philippines, the plaintiff of the instant case, fully aware that I
am executing the foregoing judicial affidavit fully conscious,
under oath and under pain of perjury, in question-and-answer
format, consistent with A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC, otherwise known
as the Judicial Affidavit Rule.
I am presently under the direct-examination of Atty.

Apryll Bulintao, of 3/F Room V308, Msgr. Charles Vath
Library Bldg., Saint Louis University, A. Bonifacio Street,
2600 Baguio City Philippines. The examination is being held at
the same address.
OFFER OF TESTIMONY
In lieu of the oral testimony in court of MOISES MENDOZA, his

Judicial Affidavit is being offered pursuant to A.M. 12-8-8-SC, known as
the Judicial Affidavit Rule, to prove that the Defendants, Wenver Garcia and
Ursula Dela Rosa, received the principal amount totaling to Two Million
28
Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php2,500,000.00) from Moises Mendoza, to
prove that despite demands for payment, defendants continuously failed and
refused to pay the amount of the loan, to prove that plaintiff is entitled to
moral and exemplary damages due to the suffering caused by defendants’
refusal to pay the amount of the loan.
DIRECT TESTIMONY
Q1: Do you swear to tell nothing but the truth and that any
untruthful statement you herein make may subject you to
criminal liability?
A1: Yes, I do.
Q2: Are you acquainted with the Defendants in this case,

Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa?
A2: Yes.
Q3: How long have you known Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela
Rosa?
A3: I knew of Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa since 1st
year of high school.
Q4: Do you know the Defendants in this case Wenver Garcia

and Ursula Dela Rosa?
A4: Yes, we are acquaintances to each other and schoolmates
having been enrolled in the same high school.
Q5: What brought about this collection case against the

defendant?
A5: It started when they loaned a sum of money from me
amounting to a total of Two Million Five Hundred Thousand
Pesos (Php2,500,000.00) with a monthly interest of Fifty
Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00), due and demandable on
November 9, 2020. I agreed because they were my schoolmates
and acquaintances.
Q6: When did they loan money from you and for how much?
A6: It was November 9, 2019 when they loaned a sum of
money from me amounting to a total of Two Million Five
Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php2,500,000.00) with a monthly
interest of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00), due and
demandable on November 9, 2020.
Q7: Do you have any evidence of the loan agreement and its
interest which you just mentioned?
29
A7: Yes. Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa signed a
promissory note.
Q8: When was the loan due and demandable?

A8: The executed promissory note has long been due and
demandable on November 9, 2020.
Q9: What happened after the loan became due and

demandable?
A9: I tried to contact Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa
through their contact numbers but it was out of reach. Through
my counsel, I tried to send three demand letters to each
defendant dated November 10, 2020, December 10, 2020, and
January 10, 2021, respectively. But despite the receipt of the
three (3) demand letters, the Defendants still failed, neglected,
and refused to pay their obligations without lawful and
justifiable cause.
Q10: What did you feel when you were not able to acquire the
payment
for the loan?
A10: I feel betrayed and hurt because I trusted them with my
hard-earned money. I am also struggling to make ends meet. I
am also struggling financially. Since his obligation remained
unpaid, I was not able to pay my own obligations. Now, my
house and lot were also in danger of being foreclosed. I trusted
them because they were my acquaintances. I experienced severe
depression and suffered through sleepless nights because I will
not know if I can still collect the large sum of money that
Wenver Garcia and Ursula Dela Rosa borrowed from me.
- End of Statement -
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

Baguio City , 9th day of September 2022
MOISES MENDOZA
Affiant
30
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, a notary public in
and for the City of Baguio this 9th day of September 2022, affiant personally
came and with her Passport ID 123445, bearing her photograph and
signature, known to me as the same person who personally signed the
foregoing instrument before me and avowed under penalty of law to the
whole truth of the contents of said instrument.
APRYLL BULINTAO
Notary Public
PTR NO:
1234567/1-04-22/Baguio City
0001231; 02-15-2020
Doc No.: 129

Page No.: 14
Book No.: 3
Series of 2022.
31
The undersigned Atty. Apryll Bulintao, under oath, deposes and states
that:
1. She is the Legal Counsel for the plaintiff in the above-
entitled case;
2. She faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the
questions asked and the corresponding answers given by the
above-named witness;
3. Neither she nor any other person, then present or assisting
her coached the witness regarding the latter’s answers; and
4. She conducted the examination of the witness at the Office of
Atty. Apryll Bulintao, Baguio City.

Baguio City, 9th day of September 2022.

Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 9th day of

September 2022 at Baguio City, Philippines.

Notary Public
PTR NO:
12344567/1-04-22/Baguio City
0001231; 02-15-2022
Doc No.: 130

Page No.: 15
Book No.: 3
Series of 2022.
32

Pleading

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pleading

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Pleading

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

Regional Trial Court

Moises Mendoza, Civil Case No.: _____

Wenver Garcia and For: Collection of Sum of

With utmost respect unto this Honorable Court, PLAINTIFF, most

1. Plaintiff Moises Mendoza (“Plaintiff”) is a Filipino citizen, of

2. Defendant Wenver Garcia (“Defendant”) is a Filipino citizen,

3. Defendant Ursula Dela Rosa (“Defendant”) is a Filipino

4. Both parties have the capacity to sue and be sued;

B. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION PRECEDENT

5. The parties did not undergo the Barangay Conciliation process

C. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

6. On November 9, 2019, Plaintiff entered into a contract of

7. In recognition of Defendants’ obligation in favor of the

8. As shown in the attached promissory note, Defendants’

9. When the obligation became due and demandable, no payment

10.The Plaintiff, through counsel, sent three demand letters to each

11.Despite the receipt of the three (3) demand letters, the

D. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Plaintiff repleads the above-stated allegations in support of the second

12.By reason of the Defendant’s unreasonable failure or refusal to

13.Plaintiff suffered moral damages amounting to THIRTY

14.By reason of Defendant’s violation and disregard of Plaintiff’s

E. RELEVANT LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE

Consequently, Article 1318 bring forth that there is no contract

“Art. 1933. By the contract of loan, one of the

“Art. 1953. A person who receives a loan of

“When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing,

17. Furthermore, in the case of Philippine National Bank vs. Cua,

"Although attorney’s fees are not allowed in the

“Default or mora, which is a kind of voluntary breach

21.Exemplary damages may also be awarded in contracts and

Article. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the

Article. 2233. Exemplary damages cannot be

F. DOCUMENTARY AND OBJECT EXHIBITS

Plaintiff hereby attaches the following documentary and object

I. The Promissory Note attached hereto as Annex “A”

22. In compliance with Section 6, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court, as

a. Mother Mary Forever - she will testify on the

b. Reigna Ng Kagandahan - she will testify on the

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court to

1. ORDERING the DEFENDANTS to PAY the PLAINTIFF

2. ORDERING the Defendants to pay Plaintiff the following:

3. Other reliefs, just and equitable, under the circumstance are

At the City of Pasig, Philippines, this 15th day of September 2022.

ANDRES AND ASSOCIATES

ATTY. APRYLL BULINTAO

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM

I, MOISES MENDOZA, of legal age, Filipino, and a resident of 99

1) I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled case;

2) I have personally caused the preparation of the foregoing

3) I have read and understood the foregoing compliant and the

4) I attest to the authenticity of the annexes thereof:

5) I have not commenced any other court action or proceeding

6) Should I thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, a notary for and in the

WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL on the date and place

Doc No. 121

Dear Mr. Garcia:

Accordingly, DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of