Accused Viado recorded their Address in the more than-named cases. In both cases he acknowledges the truth that relating to the filing of one’s Petition to your Issuance of brand new customer’s duplicates out-of TCT Zero. T-14466 and 14467, but rejects which have caused the performance regarding a different electricity out of attorneys to possess and also in account of people. He asserted that it absolutely was Marilou Soriano whom given so you’re able to your a prepared petition with annexes thereon to possess him to help you indication and you will after that to own their employed the recommendations to help you document inside legal. That it plan was explained by the Marilou Soriano and Viado features consented only when Marilou Soriano made available to your plaintiff Jacinto Soriano, following on the a controls couch, who she lead because the their father. At exactly the same time Viado wanted to assist in reconstituting this new destroyed headings getting a fee away from P80,. Viado states which he was only called throughout the Special Power out-of Lawyer which had been currently notarized and you may linked to the Petition, x x x.
Shortly after summons from the book, defendants Jose within the Civil Circumstances No. 6210-R and you may Hufana during the Municipal Instance Zero. 6211-R don’t file their particular answers. Through to action of the plaintiffs, Jose and Hufana was .
Brand new told you mortgage are protected because of the a bona fide house mortgage over the TCT No
In Respond to from inside the Civil Situation No. 6211-Roentgen, properly registered timely, BPI acknowledges sentences step one and 8 of Complaint and rejects the remainder point accusations throughout the Ailment. Part seven, applies to brand new plaintiffs denial that the Petition to your issuance of new customer’s backup content off TCT Nos. T-14466 and T-14467 has been offered hence your order find this was awarded saying that the owner’s content of one’s foregoing headings were forgotten without force and you can impression. 14466 which have BPI throughout the level of A couple Mil Pesos. Because of affirmative protections. BPI slates so it features handled Hufana entirely a great trust, and therefore, its a good mortgagee in the good-faith eligible to the protection according to the legislation. Further, it states that it is not needed going outside of the four comers of Hufana’s name, and this towards their deal with shows zero defect. The mortgage documents try notarized records and this, within the legislation, need strong assumption from frequency and legitimacy.
Abreast of action out-of plaintiffs properly provided by courtroom, an amended Issue is actually submitted by plaintiffs impleading Maria Luzviminda Patimo since defendant for the Municipal Case No. 6210-R.
Within its Treatment for the fresh Amended Problem, defendant Patimo denies the material allegations about Amended Grievance. As Unique and Affirmative Protections, Patimo so-called one as early as , she is approached by accused Jose which requested financing and given given that security TCT No. 85840. Prior to going into the told you loan application off Jose, Patimo decided to go to guarantee and look the above mentioned-mentioned identity towards the Check in of Deeds away from Baguio Urban area. 85840.
Met that there no encumbrance or other liens towards the term offered by Jose, Patimo granted the loan removed because of the Jose throughout the matter of just one Million Peso
Within the Municipal Case No. 6210-Roentgen, the truth is actually hereby overlooked concerning accused Patimo having use up all your off quality. Since defendants Jose and you can Viado, he or she is hereby bought in order to solidarity pay the plaintiffs the quantity of one million pesos while the by technique for actual problems; three hundred thousand pesos owing to ethical injuries; two hundred thousand pesos because and also by way of exemplary damages; and you can twenty-five [sic] thousand pesos while the attorney’s charge also to spend the money for cost of brand new suit.
