Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Las Pias City

SPOUSES LOLLY CUSTODIO

and ANNIE CUSTODIO,
Plaintiffs,

versus CIVIL CASE No.

_______________
For: Accion
Reivindicatoria
NIK NIK SEVILLA and all
persons claiming rights under him,
Defendants.
x------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs, by undersigned counsel and unto the

Honorable Court, respectfully depose and state that:

1. Plaintiff Spouses Lolly and Annie Custodio are of legal

age, Filipino, and with residential address at Lot 1, Block 2,
AB Street, Thomasian Village, Las Pias City. They may be
served with summons, orders and other legal processes by
the Honorable Court through undersigned counsel at the
details provided below.

2. Defendant Nik Nik Sevilla is of legal age, Filipino, and

is currently residing at Lot 2, Block 2, AB Street, Thomasian
Village, Las Pias City, where she may be served with
summons, orders and other legal processes by the
Honorable Court.

3. Plaintiff spouses are the absolute and registered

owners of a certain parcel of land located at Lot 1, Block 2,
AB Street, Thomasian Village, Las Pias City with a total area
of 500 sq.m., covered by and more particularly described in
Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-12345, issued by the
Registry of Deeds of Las Pias City, a copy of the TCT and
Tax Declaration of Property are hereby attached as Annexes
A and B, respectively.

1
 4. The said property has a market value of Php
1,250,000.00 and an assessed value of Php 750,000.00.

5. Plaintiff spouses have been the owners of the

abovementioned property since June 17, 2011 as they
bought the same from Ponky Tutay as evidenced by a
Absolute Deed of Sale, a copy of which is hereby attached as
Annex C.

6. Defendant, on the other hand, is the registered

owner of Lot 2, Block 2, AB Street, Thomasian Village, Las
Pias City, covered by and more particularly described in
Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-67890, issued by the
Registry of Deeds of Las Pias City, a copy of the TCT and
Tax Declaration of Property are hereby attached as Annexes
D and E, respectively.

7. On July 01, 2015, plaintiff spouses commissioned the

services of Engr. Maantot Umali, a survey contractor of
Honorable Realty and Sureveying Office, to conduct a
relocation survey of their lot. After the survey the results are
as follows:

The frontage of Lot 1, adjoining lot

on the south side should only be 13.00
m. but appeared to be 15.88 m. thereby
appearing that Lot 2 has encroached Lot
1 by 2.8 m. eventually forming an
overlap of 36.00 sq.m. The said overlap
is apparent, because a portion of the
building and concrete fence was built
beyond the property line.

A copy of the relocation survey result dated July 01, 2015 is

hereby attached as Annex F.

8. It appears that the overlap existed since 2005 when

an improvement was built thereon by defendant.

9. Consequently, plaintiff spouses sent a Demand Letter

to defendant to vacate the encroached portion of land. A
copy of said demand letter dated November 30, 2015 is
hereby attached as Annex G.

10. Defendant, however, ignored the demand letter

prompting plaintiff spouses to refer the matter to the Lupong
Tagapamayapa. Unfortunately, no settlement was reached.

2
Considering that the parties failed to amicably settle their
differences, a Certificate to File Action was issued to plaintiff
spouses. A copy of the certificate from Brgy. Talon II, Las
Pias City is hereby attached as Annex H.

11. The Supreme Court, in the case of Spouses Elegio

and Dolia Caezo v. Spouses Aploinario and Consorcia
Bautista, G.R. No. 170189 (September 1, 2010) held that the
proper action to recover a property is accion reivindicatoria
under Article 434 of the Civil Code:

Article 434 of the Civil Code reads:

"In an action to recover, the property
must be identified, and the plaintiff must
rely on the strength of his title and not
on the weakness of the defendants
claim." Accion reivindicatoria seeks the
recovery of ownership and includes the
jus utendi and the jus fruendi brought in
the proper regional trial court. Accion
reivindicatoria is an action whereby
plaintiff alleges ownership over a parcel
of land and seeks recovery of its full
possession.

In order that an action for the

recovery of title may prosper, it is
indispensable, in accordance with the
precedents established by the courts,
that the party who prosecutes it must
fully prove, not only his ownership of the
thing claimed, but also the identity of
the same. However, although the
identity of the thing that a party desires
to recover must be established, if the
plaintiff has already proved his right of
ownership over a tract of land, and the
defendant is occupying without right
any part of such tract, it is not
necessary for plaintiff to establish the
precise location and extent of the
portions occupied by the defendant
within the plaintiffs property.

12. In the case at bar, that plaintiff spouses are the

absolute and registered owner of the subject property as
evidenced by TCT No. T-12345. The identity of the property

3
in question is likewise particulary defined and ascertained
through the said TCT.

13. The encroached portion that plaintiff spouses

sought to recover is also categorically identified by the
relocation survey result dated July 01, 2015. To repeat, the
result of the survey showed that 36.00 sq.m. of Lot 1 was
encroached by defendants improvement.

14. Defendant, therefore, deprived plaintiff spouses of

the lawful possession of the 36.00 sq.m. occupied by her
improvement.

15. By reason of the said encroachment, defendant

must pay plaintiff spouses the reasonable rental value of
P3,600.00 per month, to be computed from July 01, 2015
until the time that possession is restored to plaintiff spouses.

16. In addition, since defendant was not given any

permission to construct any improvement on the subject
property, she is deemed to be a builder in bad faith under
Article 449 of the Civil Code which states that:

Art. 449. He who builds, plants or

sows in bad faith on the land of another,
loses what is built, planted or sown
without right to indemnity

Consequently, defendant may be directed to remove the

improvement that encroached plaintiff spouses property
without any reimbursement of costs of construction.

17. By reason of defendants unjustified refusal to

return possession of the encroached portion to plaintiff
spouses, done in bad faith and without any rightful claim of
ownership whatsoever, plaintiff spouses are entitled to moral
damages in the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php
50,000.00).

18. Also by reason of defendants unjustified refusal to

return possession, and in order to defend their rights,
plaintiff spouses were constrained to engage the services of
counsel to whom it has agreed to pay the sum of Fifty
Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00), plus an additional Five
Thousand Pesos (Php 5,000.00), for every appearance in
court, as and by way of attorneys fees.

4
 WHEREFORE, premises considered, plaintiff spouses
respectfully pray of the Honorable Court that judgment be
rendered:

a. Ordering defendant and all persons claiming

rights under her to vacate and surrender the possession
of the 36.00 sq.m. encroached by defendants
improvement to plaintiff spouses;

b. Ordering defendant to demolish the

improvement on the encroached area;

c. Ordering defendant to pay Php 3,600 per month

from July 01, 2015 until possession has been restored to
plaintiff spouses; and

d. Ordering defendant to pay plaintiff spouses (i)

Php 50,000.00 as moral damages, (ii) Php 50,000.00,
and an additional Php 5,000.00 per appearance in court
as attorneys fees; and (c) costs of suit.

Other relief just and equitable under the premises are

likewise prayed for.

Alfonso, Cavite, for Las Pias City, April 01, 2017.

REALYN M. AUSTRIA
R. M. AUSTRIA LAW OFFICE
No. 59 Usting Road
Brgy. Luksuhin Ibaba,
Alfonso, Cavite

Roll No. XXXXX

IBP No. XXXXXX/XX-XX-XX/Cavite
PTR No. XXXXXX/XX-XX-XX/Imus,
Cavite
MCLE Compliance No. XXXXXXX
Valid until April 2019

Republic of the Philippines )

Province of Cavite )
Municipality of Alfonso ) S.S.

5
 VERIFICATION AND
CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

WE, Spouses Lolly and Annie Custodio, of legal age,

Filipino and residents of Lot 1, Block 2, AB Street, Thomasian
Village, Las Pias City, after having been duly sworn to in
accordance with law, hereby depose and state:

1. That we are the plaintiffs in the instant case;

2. That WE have caused the preparation of the

foregoing pleading;

3. That WE have read all the allegations contained

therein and the same are true and correct of our own
personal knowledge and based on the authentic records;

4. No other action or proceedings involving the same

issues raised in this appeal has been commenced and/or are
pending with the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or any
division thereof, or any other tribunal, court or agency.

5. We undertake to inform this Honorable Court within

five (5) days from notice of any similar action or proceeding,
which may have been filed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We have hereunto set our hands

this April 01, 2017 at Alfonso, Cavite.

LOLLY CUSTODIO ANNIE CUSTODIO

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public

for the Province of Cavite, this April 01, 2017 at Alfonso,
Cavite, affiant exhibiting to me their SSS ID card numbered
123456 and 7890 as competent evidence of their identities.

WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL on the date

and place mentioned above.

Doc. No. 1; JOHN RAFAEL

MARQUESES
Page No. 1; Notary Public for
the

6
Book No. 1; Province of Cavite
Series of 2017. Roll No. XXXXX
IBP No. XXXXXX/XX-XX-
XX/Cavite
PTR No. XXXXXX/XX-XX-
XX/Alfonso, Cavite
MCLE Compliance No.
XXXXXXX
Valid until April 2019
Not. Commission No. TG-
XXX
JRM LAW OFFICE
Brgy. Luksuhin Ibaba,
Alfonso, Cavite