REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

FIRST JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH ___
BAGUIO CITY

HEIRS OF EDUVIGIS RAMOS

AND NELIA RAMOS as
represented by RAUL C.
RAMOS,
Plaintiffs,
CIVIL CASE NO. ____________
FOR ANNULMENT OF
- versus - DOCUMENTS, RECONVEYANCE
AND DAMAGES

RUBEN C. RAMOS,
Defendant.
x------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

PLAINTIFFS, by and through counsel, unto this Honorable

Court, respectfully state:

I
THE PARTIES

1. That Plaintiffs are all of legal age, Filipino citizens, residing

at _________________________, all represented by their co-heir
RAUL C. RAMOS, of legal age, married, Filipino citizen and a
resident of No. 189 Poblacion, Bacnotan, La Union where he may be
served with summons and other processes from this Court; (Copies
of plaintiffs’ Special Power of Attorney are hereto attached and
marked as Annex “A” and series and made integral part hereof)

2. That defendant Ruben C. Ramos is likewise of legal age,

Filipino citizen, married and a resident of No. 188 Poblacion,
Bacnotan, La Union where he may be served with summons and
other processes from this Court;
 Compliant
For Annulment of Documents, Reconveyance and Damages
Page 2 of 7

II
FACTS AND CAUSE OF ACTION

3. That plaintiffs are the grandchildren of EDUVIGIS RAMOS

(hereinafter referred to as EDUVIGIS for brevity) who died intestate
on January 8, 1991 as evidenced by a copy of her Certificate of
Death hereto attached and marked as Annex “B” and made integral
part hereof;

4. That EDUVIGIS was survived by her three (3) children,

namely: Purificacion R. Claridad (Purificacion for brevity), Artemio
Ramos (Artemio for brevity) and Nelia N. Ramos (Nelia for brevity),
all of whom are now deceased as evidenced by hereto attached
copies of their Certificates of Death, marked as Annexes “C”, “D” and
“E” respectively;

5. That Nelia died single while Purificacion was survived by

her children (herein plaintiffs), namely: Dionisio, Delly, Percy, Satty,
Mario, Manny and Ping. On the other hand, Artemio was survived by
plaintiff Crescensia Ramos, his wife, and their children Ruben (herein
defendant), plaintiffs Raul, Raffy, Roselyn, Richelle, Raquel, Ruth
(now deceased) and Roel (also deceased). Ruth died single while
Roel was survived by his children, plaintiffs Cresta, Rommel and
Ronel;

6. That EDUVIGIS is the declared owner of a parcel of land

situated at Poblacion, Bacnotan, La Union, more particularly
described as follows:

“A parcel of an orchard and residential lot containing an

area of ONE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED NINETEEN (1,619)
square meters, more or less, bounded on the North by Piscador
St.; on the East by Salvador Manantan; on the South by
National Road & Provincial Road; and on the West by Moises
Cuaresma; covered by Tax Declaration No. 161 declared in the
name of EDUVIGIS RAMOS.”

(Copy of the Tax Declaration No. 161 is hereto attached and

marked as Annex “F” and made integral part hereof)

7. That defendant was able to transfer the above-described

property in his name by virtue of an alleged confirmatory affidavit
purportedly signed by Nelia on June 8, 2010 at San Fernando City,
 Compliant
For Annulment of Documents, Reconveyance and Damages
Page 3 of 7

La Union before Notary Public Jose B. Ellazar per Doc. No. 169,
Page No. VII; Book No. 34, Series of 2010 of the latter’s Notarial
Register; (Copy thereof is hereto attached and marked as Annex “G”
and made integral part hereof)

8. That sometime in ____________, plaintiffs were astonished

to find out that the aforementioned parcel of land was already titled in
defendant’s name by virtue of Katibayan ng Origihinal na Titulo Blg.
025-2013000452 dated May 28, 2012 hereto attached and marked as
Annex “H” and made integral part hereof;

9. That the mode of transfer from Eduvigis to the defendant

was just a Confirmatory Affidavit purportedly executed by Nelia in
favor of the defendant. The said Affiavit cannot transfer ownership of
land and cannot defeat the right of the rightful heirs. Besides, Nelia is
just one of the co-owners of the land at that time, together with
Artemio, represented by his children, and Purificacion. Hence, Nelia
has no right nor authority to sign said Affidavit;

10. That also, Nelia who died on June 8, 2010 at Baguio

Medical Center, Baguio City, the youngest sibling of the late
Purificacion and Artemio, died single and without a will thus survived
by the children of Purificacion and Artemio, herein plaintiffs;

11. That at the time of her death, Nelia was the declared owner
of a parcel of land located at Bacsil, Bacnotan, La Union covered by
Tax Declaration No. 17945 and more particularly described as
follows:

“A parcel of an unirrigated Riceland containing an area of SIX

THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO (6522) square
meters, more or less, bopunded on the North by Clemente
Nebres; on the East by Alfredo Nebres; on the South by
Domingo Hernandes, etc; and on the West by National Road;
covered by Tax Declaration No. 17945 declared in the name of
NELIA RAMOS.”

(Copy of the Tax Declaration No. 17945 is hereto attached and

marked as Annex “H” and made integral part hereof)

12. That sometime in January 2014, plaintiff Raul discovered

that the above-described parcel of land was already declared in the
name of defendant by making it appear that Nelia executed a
 Compliant
For Annulment of Documents, Reconveyance and Damages
Page 4 of 7

purported Deed of Donation dated June 8, 2010 before Notary Public

Jose B. Ellazar per Doc. No. 167, Page No. VII; Book No. 34, Series
of 2010 of the latter’s Notarial Register; (Copy thereof is hereto
attached and marked as Annex “I” and made integral part hereof)

13. That as a result of the execution of the falsified Deed of

Donation, defendant was able to transfer the above-described
property in his name to the exclusion of the other heirs of Nelia; (A
copy of Tax Declaration No. 2010-03-0005-00523 declared in the
name of defendant is hereto attached and marked as Annex “J”)

14. That Nelia was confined on June 3, 2010 at Baguio Medical

Center and expired on June 8, 2010 as evidenced by hereto attached
copies of patient’s record and medical certificate marked as Annexes
“K” and “L”, respectively and made integral part hereof;

15. That Nelia could not have executed the aforementioned

Deed of Donation as well as the above-cited Confirmatory Affidavit
both dated June 8, 2010 because she died on the same date at the
Baguio Medical Center. Furthermore, apparent on the attached
Medical Certificate (Annex “L”) that she responded only to stimuli and
unable to travel and sign documents. Hence, it is physically
impossible for her to travel to San Fernando City, La Union and
execute the aforesaid documents;

16. That moreover, a judicious scrutiny of the alleged signatures

of Nelia in the Confirmatory Affidavit and Deed of Donation in
question would show glaring discrepancies which can be inferred by
visual comparison;

17. That comparing the signatures of Nelia in the falsified

documents in her specimen signature as reflected in the Statement of
Account of Summary issued by the Baguio Medical Center when she
was initially discharged at Baguio Medical Center on May 17, 2017,
specimen signature as appearing in the records of Bank of the
Philippine Island (BPI), as well as her signature appearing in the
records of PhilHealth, Deed of Self Adjudication dated December 31,
2005, Affidavit dated September 19, 1990,Affidavit dated September
27, 1990, Application for Leave dated September 17, 1990, Letter
dated September 6, 1990, Personal Data Sheet dated February 9,
1988, Application for Leave dated March 30, 1988 and Voter’s
Identification Card dated December 7, 1986 are hereto attached and
marked as Annex “M”, “N”, “O”, “P”, “Q”, “R”, “S”, “T”, “U”, “V” and “W”
respectively will indubitably show the manifest discrepancy between
 Compliant
For Annulment of Documents, Reconveyance and Damages
Page 5 of 7

the alleged signatures of Nelia in the subject documents as compared

to her standard signature;

18. That to further support plaintiffs’ claim that the purported

signatures of Nelia as appearing in the questioned documents were
forged, the following documents are submitted, to wit:

a. Sworn Statement of Roselyn Ramos Bautista (hereto

attached and marked as Annex “X” and made integral part
hereof);

b. Certification issued by the Bank of the Philippine Islands

dated July 4, 2014 (hereto attached and marked as Annex
“Y” and made integral part hereof);

c. Withdrawal slip bearing the thumbmark of Nelia dated June

8, 2010 (hereto attached and marked as Annex “Z” and
made integral part hereof);

d. Sworn Statement of Dr. Dionisio Claridad, Jr. (hereto

attached and marked as Annex “AA” and made integral part
hereof); and

e. Result of the examination conducted by the PNP Crime

Laboratory showing that the questioned documents and the
standard signatures of Nelia were not written by one and the
same person (hereto attached and marked as Annex “Z” and
made integral part hereof)

19. That in fact, 2 counts of criminal case for Falsification of

Public Document were filed against the defendant on November 24,
2014 involving the same subject documents as evidenced by hereto
attached copies of the Joint Resolution of the Office of the City
Prosecutor of San Fernando City, La Union, Informations for Criminal
Case No. 42982 and Criminal Case No. 42983 marked as Annexes “
“BB”, “CC” and “DD”, respectively;

20. That as a result of the execution of the subject deed of

donation and confirmatory affidavit, the parcels of land declared in the
name of Nelia and Eduvigis respectively were transferred in the name
of defendant to the exclusion of herein plaintiffs, the lawful heirs of
Nelia;

21. That considering that the signatures appearing on the

subject deed and affidavit were obtained through fraud, as in fact said
 Compliant
For Annulment of Documents, Reconveyance and Damages
Page 6 of 7

documents were falsified, the same are considered null and void
hence have no legal effect whatsoever. Consequently, Katibayan ng
Origihinal na Titulo Blg. 025-2013000452 (Annex “H”) and Tax
Declaration No. 2010-03-0005-00523 (Annex “J”) are likewise void;

22. That plaintiffs personally and through their representative

Raul, had exhausted all ways and means available to settle this case
between them with defendant but all efforts were in vain;

23. That plaintiffs even referred this case to the Office of the
Punong Barangay of Poblacion, Bacnotan, La Union but no
settlement was reached; (Copy of the Barangay Certification to File
Action is hereto attached and marked as Annex “DD”, forming part of
this complaint)

24. That by reason of defendant’s bad faith and malicious acts

of falsifying the deed of donation and confirmatory affidavit thereby
transferring and declaring the subject parcels of land in his name,
plaintiffs herein suffered untold serious anxiety, mental anguish,
moral shock, wounded feeling, and unending sleepless nights,
hence, defendant should be assessed moral damages, the extent of
which is beyond pecuniary estimation, but which may not be less than
P50,000.00;

25. That because of defendant’s unfairness, dishonesty and

bad faith, herein plaintiffs are compelled to engage the services of a
counsel to represent them in this case, hence, plaintiff must be
assessed damages by way of Attorney’s fees in the amount of
P50,000.00 in accordance with Section 16-D of Republic Act No.
9406 otherwise known as An Act Reorganizing and Strengthening the
Public Attorney’s Office (PAO);

26. That moreover, defendant should be taught a lesson not to

trample the rights of others thus they should be made to pay
exemplary damages in the amount of P50,000.00;

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that judgment issue:

a. Declaring the Confirmatory Affidavit and Deed of Donation

both dated June 8, 2010, Katibayan ng Origihinal na Titulo Blg.
025-2013000452 and Tax Declaration No. 2010-03-0005-00523
null and void;
 Compliant
For Annulment of Documents, Reconveyance and Damages
Page 7 of 7

b. Ordering defendant to reconvey unto plaintiffs their lawful

portion of the real properties situated at Poblacion and Bacsil,
Bacnotan, La Union previously covered and embraced by the
Tax Declaration No. 161 and Tax Declaration No. 17945,
respectively;

c. Ordering defendants to pay Plaintiff moral damages in the

amount of P50,000.00; Attorney’s fees in the amount of
P50,000.00, and exemplary damages in the amount of
P50,000.00;

Plaintiff further prays for such other reliefs just and equitable
under the premises.

San Fernando City, La Union, Philippines, this ___ day of May,

2017.

COUNSEL

CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION