Defendant Viado submitted his Respond to in the over-entitled instances. In the two cases the guy acknowledges the fact regarding the submitting of the Petition for the Issuance of new user’s duplicates out-of TCT No. T-14466 and you may 14467, but rejects having was the cause of delivery from an alternative power off attorneys to own plus account of the people. The guy asserted that it actually was Marilou Soriano whom passed to him a prepared petition which have annexes on that having him to signal and you will afterwards to possess their hired counsel so you can file when you look at the judge. It plan try told me by the Marilou Soriano and Viado have conformed on condition that Marilou Soriano made available to your plaintiff Jacinto Soriano, up coming toward a controls settee, whom she delivered because their father. At exactly the same time Viado offered to help in reconstituting the lost titles to have a charge off P80,. Viado claims he was only entitled from the Unique Stamina regarding Attorneys which had been currently notarized and you may connected to the Petition, x x x.
Just after summons from the guide, defendants Jose when you look at the Civil Circumstances No. 6210-Roentgen and you will Hufana for the Municipal Case Zero. 6211-R failed to document its respective responses. Up on action by the plaintiffs, Jose and you will Hufana was .
Brand new told you financing was safeguarded from the a real home mortgage more this new TCT Zero
In its Answer for the Civil Case Zero. 6211-R, properly submitted punctually, BPI acknowledges sentences step 1 and you can 8 of Ailment and denies the remainder topic allegations regarding the Grievance. Part seven, pertains to the fresh plaintiffs assertion your Petition toward issuance of brand new customer’s backup content off TCT Nos. T-14466 and T-14467 has been provided and that an order are provided saying the owner’s copy of your own foregoing headings was basically forgotten and no push and effect. 14466 which have BPI regarding level of One or two Million Pesos. Using affirmative protections. BPI slates it has actually cared for Hufana entirely a beneficial trust, and as such, it is a beneficial mortgagee during the good-faith entitled to the safety beneath the rules. After that, it says it is not needed to go outside the four comers regarding Hufana’s term, hence for the their face shows no defect. The borrowed funds records try notarized documents and that, in rules, deserve good expectation off volume and you will legitimacy.
Abreast of action regarding plaintiffs properly granted from the courtroom, a revised Problem was submitted of the plaintiffs impleading Maria Luzviminda Patimo since the accused when you look at the Municipal Instance No. 6210-R.
In Solution to new Amended Complaint, defendant Patimo denies the materials accusations regarding try this the Amended Issue. Due to the fact Special and you will Affirmative Defenses, Patimo so-called that as early as , she was contacted of the offender Jose just who asked for a loan and you can provided due to the fact collateral TCT Zero. 85840. Before entering the said application for the loan out of Jose, Patimo went along to make sure and look the above mentioned-said name to your Check in out-of Deeds from Baguio Urban area. 85840.
Came across that there zero burden and other liens to your term offered by Jose, Patimo supplied the loan taken out from the Jose about count of one Mil Peso
From inside the Municipal Case No. 6210-R, the truth is actually hereby dismissed about accused Patimo having lack away from quality. By defendants Jose and you may Viado, he is hereby purchased to help you solidarity pay the plaintiffs the amount of one mil pesos just like the and by way of actual problems; 300 thousand pesos owing to ethical damage; 2 hundred thousand pesos since the by way of excellent damages; and you may 25 [sic] thousand pesos just like the attorney’s charges in order to pay the price of this new match.