Lunes, Setyembre 14, 2015

SAMPLE JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT

Below is a Judicial Affidavit I made as one of the requirements for Legal Counselling class. When I was on the process of doing this affidavit, I searched the net for some samples and I was disappointed because I did not find any. So to help law students, like me, I am posting this Judicial Affidavit. :)




Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
5th Judicial Region
Branch XX
Naga City


SPOUSES JUAN AND JUANA SANTOS
                                    Plaintiffs,


-         versus   -                                                       Civil Case No. L-0127
                                                                           For: Declaration of Nullity of Real                                                                                    Estate Mortgage


ABC BANKING CORPORATION
                                    Defendant.
x-------------------------------------------------x


JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT

            I, ROSALINDA CRUZ, of legal age, Filipino, single, a resident of and with post office address at 123 Sta. Cruz St. Naga City, am testifying as one of the witnesses for the defendant in the above entitled case, and, fully conscious and aware that I answer the questions propounded under oath and may thus be held criminally liable for false testimony or perjury, under oath, hereby depose and state:

Q1      -                 Who is the lawyer conducting this examination and please state the place where this examination is being conducted?

A   -     Atty. ____________________________, and the examination is being held at 2/F ACE Corporate Center, Naga City.

Q2      -                 In what manner has Atty. ________________ conducted the   examination, as regards the questions asked and the answers you gave?

A   -     Atty. __________________ has encoded in her desktop computer the questions she prepared, and, read them to me, and asked me to answer each and every question she asks.

Q3      -                 Is there anyone else present while the examination is being conducted?

A         -           None ma’am.

Q4      -                 Do you know the defendant in this case?

A         -           Yes, ma’am.

Q5      -                 Why do you know the defendant ABC Banking Corporation?

A         -           I am employed as the manager for its Naga City Office since  2010.

Q6      -                 What are your responsibilities as a manager?

A         -           I am responsible for the management and operations of the   bank.

Q7      -                 How about the plaintiffs in this case, do you know them?

A         -           Not personally ma’am. But I know that they filed a complaint against ABC Banking Corporation regarding an alleged void real estate mortgage executed in favor of the bank.

Q8      -                 I am showing to you a two-page certified true copy of a “Real Estate Mortgage”  dated and notarized on January 2, 1992 previously marked as Exhibit “1”, are you referring to this?

A        -          Yes, ma’am.
Q9      -                 Why did the plaintiffs in this case execute a mortgage contract?

A         -           It is a security for payment because the spouses Santos obtained a loan of one hundred and fifty thousand-peso (P 150,000) from ABC Bank.

Q10      -            What are the properties mortgaged by the plaintiffs in this mortgage contract?

A         -           The plaintiffs mortgaged two parcels of land located in Naga City, the first covered by Transfer Certificate Title (TCT) No. 12345 and the second by Tax Declaration (TD) No. 678910 and designated as Cadastral Lot No.  10.

Q11      -            Were the plaintiffs able to pay their loan when it became due?

A         -           No, ma’am.

Q12      -            What did the bank do, if any, when the plaintiffs defaulted on their loan obligation?

A         -           After several demands, both oral and written, all of which were not heeded, the bank finally decided to foreclose the mortgage extra judicially.

Q13      -            I am showing to you a one-page certified true copy of a “Notice of Extra Judicial Foreclosure” previously marked as Exhibit “2”, are you referring to this?

A         -           Yes, ma’am.

Q14      -            Who was the buyer of the properties when the same were sold at the foreclosure sale?

A         -           ABC Banking Corporation, as lone bidder, bought the properties for P400,000.  ABC was issued a Certificate of Extra-Judicial Sale.

Q15      -            Showing to you this “Certificate of Extra-Judicial Sale” marked as Exhibit “3”, are you referring to this?

A         -           Yes, ma’am.

Q16      -            What did ABC Banking Corporation do after the issuance of the said certificate?

A         -           ABC secured a writ of possession after it acquired the property as winning bidder.

Q17      -            Did the plaintiffs redeem the properties during the redemption period allowed by law?

A         -           No, ma’am.

Q18      -            When the plaintiffs failed to redeem the properties what did ABC Banking Corporation do, if any?

A         -           ABC Banking Corporation consolidated its ownership over the subject properties. ABC also secured a new title over the property covered by TCT No. 12345 and new tax declaration under its name for Lot No. 10

Q19      -            I here show you to you an “Affidavit of Consolidation of Ownership”, a “Transfer Certificate Title No. 111213” and a “Tax Declaration No. 141516”, all of which were previously marked as Exhibits “4”, “5” and “6” respectively, are these the documents you are referring to?

A         -           Yes, ma’am.

Q20      -            How did this case come to your attention?

A         -           On 1 May 2015, ABC Banking Corporation has received a copy of a complaint filed by spouses Santos seeking the declaration of nullity of mortgage over Lot No. 10.

Q21      -            What is the basis of the plaintiffs in arguing that the mortgage over Lot No. 10 is void?

A         -           The plaintiffs contended that a mortgage could not have been validly constituted over Lot No. 10 because they were not the owners of the property when the mortgage was created.

Q22      -            What can you say about the plaintiffs’ contention?

A         -           Such allegation is baseless and is a desperate attempt to nullify a valid mortgage.

Q23      -            Did you verify the ownership of the plaintiffs of Lot No. 10 before the execution of mortgage contract?

A         -           Yes, ma’am.

Q24      -            What evidence do you have to prove that the plaintiffs were the owner of Lot No. 10 before and during the execution of mortgage contract?

A   -     Prior to the approval of the loan, our property appraiser and credit investigator conducted an ocular inspection of the properties and verified that the spouses were in fact the owners of the properties. Their residence is even constructed on Lot No. 10 during the execution of the mortgage up to present.

Q25      -            I show to you an “Ocular Inspection Report” previously marked as Exhibit “7”, is this the document you are referring to?

A         -           Yes, ma’am.

Q31    -           Are there other evidence to prove their ownership of Lot No. 10?

A   -     The former tax declaration of the subject lot, Tax Declaration No. 678910, clearly reflects their ownership of the property as early as 12 September 1990 or a little less than two years prior to the constitution of mortgage.

Q32    -           I show to you this “Tax Declaration No. 678910” marked as Exhibit “8”, is this the same tax declaration which proves the plaintiffs’ ownership over Lot No. 10?

A         -           Yes, ma’am.

Q33    -           Do you have anything to add?

A         -           None, ma’am.

In witness whereof, I here sign my name this 1st day of September, 2015 at Naga City, Philippines.


                                                                        ROSALINDA CRUZ

SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me, this 1st day of September, 2015 at Naga City, personally appeared ROSALINDA CRUZ with LTO Driver’s License No. HE98765 to expire on 08 March 2016, known to me to be the same person who executed this Judicial Affidavit and who acknowledged to me that the same as her free act and deed.
           
            Witness my hand and seal.

Doc. No. ___
Page No. ___
Book No.___
Series of 2015

LAWYER’S ATTESTATION

            I, ___________________________________, under my own oath as a lawyer hereby attest that I conducted the examination of the witness, that I have faithfully recorded the questions I asked and the corresponding answers that the witness gave, and that neither I nor any other person, then present or assisting me coached the witness regarding her answers.

In witness whereof, I here sign my name this 1st day of September, 2015 at Naga City, Philippines.


                                                                        ___________________________________
                                                                       

SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me, this 1st day of September, 2015 at Naga City, personally appeared ____________________________________ with LTO Driver’s License No. IR7890123 to expire on 27 January 2016. I further certify that I personally examined the affiant and I am satisfied that she fully understood and voluntarily executed the foregoing attestation.
           
            Witness my hand and seal.

Doc. No. ___
Page No. ___
Book No.___
Series of 2015


Copy furnished: (by personal service)

ATTY. _______________________
Counsel for the Plaintiffs

123 Mayon Ave., Naga City


1 komento: