Complaint - Dulfo-Medida Vs Delgado - 041318

Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM

Provincial Agrarian Reform Office
Tandag, Surigao del Sur
Heirs of Pablo Dulfo

represented by Minda
Dulfo Medida,
Landowners-Complainants, CASE NO. __________
FOR: Ejectment and Payment of
-versus- Rentals
Romeo Usares Delgado, Jr.,

Tenant-Respondent.
x----------------------------------/
Complaint
COMES NOW, Complainant, by counsel unto this Honorable Office, most
respectfully allege:
Nature of the Case
1. That this is a case for:

a. ejectment due to –
a.1. as to the 3.5 hectare portion
a.1.a. non-payment of rentals and
a.1.b. non-execution of written promise despite agreement
before the MARO as contained in the Minutes of
Mediation Conference last 25 May 2017;
a.2. as to the 4.0 hectare portion
a.2.a. he was never a tenant thereto and
a.2.b. alternatively, granting for the sake of argument that he
was a tenant thereto, without admitting the same, he
completely abandoned the same for almost three (3)
years now;
b. payment of rentals, for the 3.5 hectare portion;
Page | 1
Parties to the Case
2. That Landowners-Complainants are the Heirs of Pablo Dulfo

represented by Minda D. Medida, of legal age, Filipino, married and a resident of
RB Castillo Street, Mangagoy, Bislig City, Surigao del Sur, where they can be
served with summonses and other purposes of this Honorable; a copy of the
Special Power of Attorney of Minda D. Medida is attached hereto as Annex “A”
and made an integral part hereof;
3. That the Landowners-Complainants are represented by their counsel,

Atty. Geoffrey G. Cagakit, whose law office is located at Abarca Street,
Mangagoy, Bislig City, Surigao del Sur, where he could be served with summonses
and other processes of this Honorable Court;
4. That the Tenant-Respondent is Romeo “alias Bobong” U. Delgado,

Jr., of legal age, Filipino, married and a resident of Sitio Tagbobo, Brgy.
Tagpoporan, Lingig
Subject Property
5. That properties subject matter of the instant case are PORTIONS of a

parcel of land covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-2214 under the name
of Pablo Dulfo, a copy of which is attached hereto as Annex “B” and made an
integral part hereof (the “Subject Property”);
6. That the PORTIONS referred to are indicated in item 1 of the Decision

quoted in allegation number 7 hereof and are more particularly described as
follows, to wit:
“the subject landholding with an area of 4.0 hectares and 3.5

hectares, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-2214,
all situated at Tagbobo, Tagpupura(n), Lingig, Surigao del Sur”
Prior Proceedings/Factual Antecedents
7. That in an earlier case filed by herein tenant-respondent Romeo U.

Delgado, Jr. against herein landowner-respondent Heirs of Pablo Dulfo
represented by Minda Dulfo Medida which was docketed as DARAB Case No. SDS-
XIII-4865 for Illegal Ejectment and Damages/Reinstatement, a Writ of Execution
Page | 2
was issued last February 1, 2016 (a copy of which is attached hereto as Annex “C”
and made an integral part hereof) pursuant a Decision dated July 27, 2015, the
dispositive portion of which was quoted therein is hereby quoted hereunder,
thus:
“WHEREFORE, premises considered, Judgement is hereby rendered as

follows:
1. DECLARING plaintiff ROMEO U. DELGADO, JR. as the bonafide tenant

to the two (2) portions of the subject landholding with an area of 4.0
hectares and 3.5 hectares, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No.
T-2214, all situated at Tagbobo, Tagpupura(n), Lingig, Surigao del Sur;
2. ORDERING the immediate reinstatement of plaintiff ROMEO U.

DELGADO, JR. to the said two portions of the subject landholding;
3. DIRECTING the respondents and all persons acting on their behalf to

recognize and respect the possession, cultivation and enjoyment of
the subject land by the plaintiff; and
4. ORDERING the DAR, thru the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer

(MARO) of the locality concerned to facilitate the immediate
execution of the corresponding agricultural leasehold contract
involving the subject landholding pursuant to R.A. 3844, as amended
and its implementing guidelines.
SO ORDERED.”
8. That, in the above-mentioned Writ of Execution, Engr. Ritchell Jhon

V. Amoguis, DAR Provincial Sheriff in Tandag, Surigao del Sur, was directed by OIC
Regional Adjudicate Glenn L. Auza to implement the decision of the subject case
in coordination with the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) of Lingig,
Surigao del Sur, and, if necessary, to seek the assistance of the Philippine National
Police (PNP) to implement the said decision;
9. That, subsequent to the supposed implementation of the aforestated

July 27, 2015 DARAB Decision, it appeared that while herein tenant-respondent
ATTENDED TO THE 3.5 HECTARES as directed/awarded, he TOTALLY
DISREGARDED AND/OR EVEN ABANDONED THE 4.0 HECTARES PORTION;
10. That, as far as the 4.0 hectare portion of the Subject Property is
concerned, it turned out that herein respondent Romeo U. Delgado, Jr. was never
a tenant thereto;
Page | 3
a. in fact, in lieu of the same and for a limited period of time only, he
harvested the coconuts of another parcel of land, in total violation
of the above-quoted July 27, 2015 Decision of the DARAB;
a.1. needless to say, there is another tenant in that other

property in the person of ______________;
a.2. the fact alone that herein respondent did not know the exact
location of the land that was supposedly granted to him in
the subject DARAB Decision only bolsters the allegation that
he was never a tenant thereto;
b. respondent Romeo U. Delgado, Jr. was never able to enter,

possess, cultivate and enjoy the 4.0 hectare portion of the Subject
Property because there was likewise another tenant, in the
person of _____________, who possessed, cultivated and enjoyed
the same PRIOR TO the interest and knowledge of herein
respondent Romeo U. Delgado, Jr. in the said 4.0 hectare portion
of the Subject Property;
11. That, as far as the 3.5 hectare portion of the Subject Property is
concerned,
11.a. herein tenant-respondent has been caught, on at least two

occasions, to have harvested coconut thereon without paying
rental to herein landholders-complainants, to wit:
11.a.1. last October 19, 2017, tenant-respondent had a gross

income of P10,848.00 and a net income of P8,053.00,
as shown in the computations, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Annex “D” which is made an
integral part hereof;
11.a.2. last December 31, 2017, tenant-respondent had a gross

income of P116,530.00 and a net income of
P12,370.00, as shown in the computations, a copy of
which is attached hereto as Annex “E” which is made
an integral part hereof;
Page | 4
11.b. likewise, herein tenant-respondent failed and/or refused to
execute a written promise despite agreement before the
MARO as contained in the Minutes of Mediation Conference
last 25 May 2017;
11.b.1. a copy of the Minutes of Mediation Conference held

last May 25, 2017 is attached hereto as Annex “F” and
made an integral part hereof;
11.b.2. as already above (item 11.a.), herein tenant-

respondent already harvested coconuts without
executing the written promise, as previously agreed
12. That, because of the foregoing, herein landowners-complainants

cause the incidents to be recorded in the police blotter as evidenced by an Extract
from the Police Blotter Book, a copy of which is attached hereto as Annex “G”
and made an integral part hereof;
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, after due notice and hearing, it is
respectfully prayed unto this Honorable Office –
a. ORDER the EJECTMENT of herein tenant-respondent from that portion

of the Subject Property with an area of 3.5 hectares;
b. DIRECT herein tenant-respondent to PAY the rental amount, as may be

determined by this Honorable Office, on the subject 3.5 hectare portion;
c. DECLARE that, henceforth, herein tenant-respondent is WITHOUT ANY

RIGHT TO POSSESS, CULTIVATE AND ENJOY that portion of the Subject
Property with an area of 4.0 hectares by reason of abandonment or,
alternatively, by reason of the fact that there is simply no factual basis
for the same;
Other relief which are just and equitable under the circumstances are
likewise prayed for by herein plaintiff.
16 April, 2018. Mangagoy, Bislig City, Surigao del Sur.
Page | 5
ATTY. GEOFFREY G. CAGAKIT
Counsel for Landowners-Complainant
CAGAKIT LAW OFFICE
J. Abarca Street, Mangagoy, 8311 Bislig City, Surigao del Sur
Attorney’s Roll No. 47368
MCLE Compliance No. V-0006787 / 04-14-2019
PTR No. 0139962 / 010818 / City of Bislig;
IBP OR No. 1064075 / 010918 / Surigao del Sur Chapter
Telephone number (086) 628-2007; Cell phone number (0998)988-9285
Page | 6
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
We, Spouses MATEO D. MEDIDA and MINDA D. MEDIDA, all of legal ages,
Filipinos, husband and wife, respectfully, and residing at Mangagoy, Bislig City,
Surigao del Sur, after having been sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby
depose and state:
1. That we are the plaintiffs in the above-captioned case;
2. That we have caused the preparation of the foregoing Motion for
Reconsideration;
3. That all the contents and allegations therein contained in the said
pleadings are true and correct of our own personal knowledge and based on
authentic records;
4. That we have not commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different
Divisions thereof, or before any other tribunal or agency, and that to the best of
our knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court,
the Court of Appeals or any Division thereof or before any other tribunal or
agency; and
5. That should we learn that any other similar action or proceeding has
been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any
other tribunal or agency, we undertake to report that fact within five (5) days
therefrom to the Court or agency wherein the original pleading and sworn
certification has been filed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed our signatures this 18th
day of May, 2017 in Mangagoy, Bislig City, Surigao del Sur, Philippines.
MATEO D. MEDIDA MINDA D. MEDIDA

Affiant Affiant
OSCA ID with Control No. _________ OSCA ID with Control No. 06634
issued by the City of Bislig on ________ issued by the City of Bislig on April 23, 2012
Republic of the Philippines )
Province of Surigao del Sur ) SS.
City of Bislig )
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public for and in the City
of Bislig, this 18th day of May, 2017, by above-named affiants who exhibited to me
their proofs of personal identities.
Doc. No. ;
Page No. ;
Book No. ;
Series of 2018.
Page | 7

Complaint - Dulfo-Medida Vs Delgado - 041318

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complaint - Dulfo-Medida Vs Delgado - 041318

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complaint - Dulfo-Medida Vs Delgado - 041318

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM

Heirs of Pablo Dulfo

Romeo Usares Delgado, Jr.,

Nature of the Case

1. That this is a case for:

2. That Landowners-Complainants are the Heirs of Pablo Dulfo

3. That the Landowners-Complainants are represented by their counsel,

4. That the Tenant-Respondent is Romeo “alias Bobong” U. Delgado,

5. That properties subject matter of the instant case are PORTIONS of a

6. That the PORTIONS referred to are indicated in item 1 of the Decision

“the subject landholding with an area of 4.0 hectares and 3.5

Prior Proceedings/Factual Antecedents

7. That in an earlier case filed by herein tenant-respondent Romeo U.

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, Judgement is hereby rendered as

1. DECLARING plaintiff ROMEO U. DELGADO, JR. as the bonafide tenant

2. ORDERING the immediate reinstatement of plaintiff ROMEO U.

3. DIRECTING the respondents and all persons acting on their behalf to

4. ORDERING the DAR, thru the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer

8. That, in the above-mentioned Writ of Execution, Engr. Ritchell Jhon

9. That, subsequent to the supposed implementation of the aforestated

a.1. needless to say, there is another tenant in that other

b. respondent Romeo U. Delgado, Jr. was never able to enter,

11.a. herein tenant-respondent has been caught, on at least two

11.a.1. last October 19, 2017, tenant-respondent had a gross

11.a.2. last December 31, 2017, tenant-respondent had a gross

11.b.1. a copy of the Minutes of Mediation Conference held

11.b.2. as already above (item 11.a.), herein tenant-

12. That, because of the foregoing, herein landowners-complainants

a. ORDER the EJECTMENT of herein tenant-respondent from that portion

b. DIRECT herein tenant-respondent to PAY the rental amount, as may be

c. DECLARE that, henceforth, herein tenant-respondent is WITHOUT ANY

16 April, 2018. Mangagoy, Bislig City, Surigao del Sur.

MATEO D. MEDIDA MINDA D. MEDIDA

You might also like