Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT


NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
Mandaluyong City, Branch 60

JASMIN A. CRUZ,
Plaintiff.

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO. 12-9810


For: Unlawful Detainer
JOTHAM B. FUNCLARA,
Defendant.

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW, the plaintiff together with the undersigned counsel to this most
honorable court, MOST RESPECTFULLY STATES THAT:

1. Plaintiff is of legal age, Filipino, single, and with residence at #125 P. Martinez St.,
Bagong Silang, Mandaluyong City where she may be served with court processes, motions and
decisions;

2. Defendant is likewise of legal age, Filipino, single with residence at #89 J. Luna
St., Bagong Silang, Mandaluyong City, where he could be served with summons and other
processes of the Court;

3. The Plaintiff is the owner of the two-storey house unit located at #134 Mariveles
St., Highway Hiils, Mandaluyong City as evidenced by pertinent documents like tax declaration
and deed of sale. (Annex “A)

4. The Defendant is the lessee of the house unit that is owned by the Plaintiff as
evidenced by the written contract of lease that both parties signed. (Annex “B”).

5. The Plaintiff and the Defendant came up with a written agreement of Lease on
August 26, 2016, which they both agreed upon and was duly signed by the two parties as shown
in their contract of lease. (Annex “B”)

6. Item No. 16 of the contract which the defendant signed expressly provides that he
will only be occupying the property for one (1) year, after which, he will vacate the house when
that term expires. (Annex “B”)

7. The contract also provides that the defendant should also take care of the property
and its premises” with the utmost diligence”.

8. On August 30, 2017, the plaintiff, after returning from Japan, was surprised to
discover that the defendant did not vacate the property as he expected. Worse, he installed a “sari-
sari store” in the original building structure of the house unit.

1
9. The plaintiff confronted the defendant about it but the defendant claimed that it was
a “DEED OF SALE” which they signed and not a “CONTRACT OF LEASE” and therefore, the
defendant is the new owner of the house unit.

10. On November 20, 2017, after continuous demands, the defendant constantly
refuses to vacate the house unit and even invited relatives to stay with him. The continued refusal
of defendant to settle his account prompted the plaintiff-creditor to lodge a complaint with the
barangay officials of Barangay Bagong Silang, Mandaluyong City. A Certificate to File Action,
copy of which is hereto attached as Annex “C,” was subsequently issued for failure of the parties
to come to an Agreement.

11. The defendant willfully and maliciously violated the agreement which they
mutually agreed upon, and which the defendant signed.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court


that judgment be rendered in favor of the plaintiff and that after judgment;

a. The defendant shall vacate the house unit owned by the plaintiff.

b. The defendant shall be ordered to pay P 120, 000 for the Attorney’s Fees.

Further, plaintiff prays for other just and equitable reliefs.

Mandaluyong City, 14 June 2018.

Atty. SUNSHINE S. RED


Counsel for the Plaintiff
Worldwide Corporate Center Edsa Shaw Blvd., Highway Hills, Mandaluyong City
Roll No. 87541 IBP No. 463091 dated 06-06-12
MCLE Compliance No. 15-00054321