Defendant Viado registered their Answer from the over-titled circumstances. In both cases he admits that relating to the filing of the Petition towards the Issuance of brand new user’s duplicates from TCT No. T-14466 and you may 14467, but rejects which have caused the execution regarding a different energy of lawyer to have plus in account of your customers. He asserted that it actually was Marilou Soriano just who handed so you can him a ready petition having annexes thereon to own him in order to signal and afterwards getting their hired counsel to help you document inside court. So it plan was said of the Marilou Soriano and Viado has conformed as long as Marilou Soriano made available to your plaintiff Jacinto Soriano, upcoming towards the a controls sofa, just who she put given that his dad. On the other hand Viado agreed to help in reconstituting this new destroyed titles to have a fee away from P80,. Viado states he was only titled about Special Power from Attorney that has been already notarized and you may linked to the Petition, x South Dakota title loans x x.
Shortly after summons by guide, defendants Jose in the Municipal Instance Zero. 6210-Roentgen and Hufana into the Municipal Case No. 6211-R failed to file its respective solutions. Abreast of activity by the plaintiffs, Jose and you will Hufana were .
This new told you mortgage is actually secure from the a bona fide property home loan more the latest TCT Zero
Within its Respond to in the Municipal Case Zero. 6211-Roentgen, properly recorded on time, BPI admits paragraphs 1 and 8 of one’s Criticism and you will rejects all of those other situation allegations on Problem. Part eight, pertains to the fresh new plaintiffs denial that Petition for the issuance of the latest customer’s duplicate copy of TCT Nos. T-14466 and you will T-14467 has been offered and that your order are approved claiming that owner’s duplicate of the foregoing headings was destroyed and no force and you will perception. 14466 that have BPI on the amount of Two Mil Pesos. Compliment of affirmative protections. BPI slates it provides cared for Hufana entirely good faith, and thus, it is an effective mortgagee for the good faith eligible to the protection according to the rules. Then, they says that it is not needed to go beyond the four comers out of Hufana’s name, and this towards the face suggests zero defect. The loan documents try notarized documents and this, according to the laws, need strong presumption of frequency and legitimacy.
On actions off plaintiffs properly provided of the judge, a revised Complaint is actually submitted by plaintiffs impleading Maria Luzviminda Patimo because accused in the Municipal Case Zero. 6210-Roentgen.
Within the Solution to the newest Revised Grievance, offender Patimo denies the materials allegations on the Revised Problem. As Special and you can Affirmative Defenses, Patimo alleged you to around , she was reached because of the defendant Jose just who requested a loan and provided due to the fact equity TCT Zero. 85840. Just before going into the told you application for the loan out-of Jose, Patimo went to be sure and look the aforementioned-stated label to your Register of Deeds regarding Baguio Area. 85840.
Satisfied that there no burden and other liens to your title offered by Jose, Patimo granted the borrowed funds applied for from the Jose throughout the count of 1 Mil Peso
For the Civil Case Zero. 6210-R, the outcome is hereby disregarded as to defendant Patimo to have use up all your from merit. At the time of defendants Jose and Viado, he’s hereby purchased to solidarity afford the plaintiffs the quantity of 1 million pesos while the and also by technique for actual damage; 300 thousand pesos by way of ethical problems; 2 hundred thousand pesos given that and also by way of exemplary damages; and you will twenty-five [sic] thousand pesos because the attorney’s charges also to pay the cost of the fresh new fit.
