REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

PROVINCE OF QUIRINO
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH ____
MUNICIPALITY OF CABARROGUIS

ERNESTO M. AGUSTIN, JR.,

Petitioner,

-versus- Civil Case No. __________

For: Declaration of Nullity
of Marriage under
Art. 36 of Family
Code
CHERRYL LOPEZ,
Respondent,
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

PETITION
COMES NOW petitioner, through the undersigned counsel
and to this Honorable Court, respectfully alleges:

1. That petitioner ERNESTO M. AGUSTIN, JR. is of legal age,

married, Filipino and resident of Ricarte Sur, Diffun, Quirino which
attached hereto are Certificate of Residence issued by the
Punong Barangay of Ricarte Sur, Sketch of Residence, Sworn
Statement of the undersigned that petitioner,s residence was
personally verified and Electricity bill of the Petitioner’s mother,
MRS. FEMENA AGUSTIN whom he currently lives with, marked as
Annexes “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” ;

2. That respondent CHERRYL R. LOPEZ is likewise of legal

age, married, Filipino, currently an Overseas Filipino
Worker(OFW) at Hong Kong with workplace address at Flat B,
12/F Block 40, Broadway Miefoo Sun Chuen, Kowloon, Hong
Kong (mobile No. +85266545941) but with permanent address at
Ricarte Sur, Diffun, Quirino;

3. That petitioner and respondent celebrated their

marriage on April 6, 2002 before the Parish Church of St. Joseph,
Diffun, Quirino, certified true copy of their Marriage Certificate is
1
attached and made integral part hereof as Annex “E”;

4. That petitioner and respondent have one child. They

have no written agreement executed before the marriage to
govern their property relations nor have any community
property acquired during their marriage. They have no debts;

5. That petitioner and the respondent are neighbors in

Barangay Ricarte Sur, Diffun, Quirino and as such have known
for each other for quite some time before their romance
culminated before the Parish Priest of St. Joseph, DIffun, Quirino;

6. That in a short span of time they had been together, they

were forced to marry since CHERYL was already pregnant at
that time. Petitioner was only 18 and Respondent was only 21
when they got married;

7. That in 2003, a child was born named LOVELYN L.

AGUSTIN;

8. In 2006, respondent went to Brunei Darussalam to work.

During that period, she seldom call nor even write the petitioner
and their daughter;

9. On or about 23 October 2008, respondent went home

from Brunei but refused to be fetched at the airport;

10. When she arrived home, she keeps on holding her

phone for calls and text messages which has become
bothersome for the Petitioner for she doesn’t even want to be
hugged or kissed;

11. That when he got hold of it the phone, petitioner was

able to read messages. One of which that he cannot forget is,
“Mahal ko masakit na ang tiyan ko sa kahihilot, ubos na yung
gamot na binigay mo”;

12. The petitioner upon reading it got angry and so

respondent went home to the house of her parents;

13. Petitioner overthink and can no longer handle the

situation to the point that on October 24, 2008 or just the
following day, he poisoned himself and got hospitalized at
Quirino Provincial Hospital for one (1) week;

2
 14. Just after 30 days after the respondent arrived, she went
back to Brunei again to work without even visiting the petitioner
at the hospital nor even talked to him within that 30-day
vacation;

15. That the care and custody of their only child has always
been with the petitioner and his mother;

16. That after six (6) months or sometime in April 2009,

respondent arrived pregnant with another man for there was no
possibility of sexual congress between them. That even would
she see their child with the petitioner in their barangay, she
wouldn’t even dare to talk to their child;

I7. In May 16, 2009, petitioner concluded that his marriage

with respondent can no longer be fixed and has thus decided
to go to Saudi Arabia to work and forget about all the
heartaches;

18. That while respondent was in Saudi working,

respondent was able to live with another man and lived in
Ricarte Sur just the same and was impregnated again with
another man other than the husband nor the father of her
second child;

19. Respondent has three (3) children, and the eldest is the
petitioner’s daughter, but the two (2) were from different men;

20. That other instances, wherein such instability could be

reasonably inferred are as follows:

a. After their marriage, she was not a responsible mother

nor wife;

b. That the respondent does not want to have a child

as much as possible because it will only add burden to her life;

c. That parties would fight even for the smallest things

through not due to the fault of the petitioner, and frequently,
the respondent would always apologize to the petitioner, but
later on, he will repeat his quarrelsome and troublesome ways;

3
 d. She prefers to hang out with friends and with her flings
instead of being with petitioner;

21. That during their honeymoon period, things were running

smoothly between them, but not on the succeeding week,
when the respondent’s instability started to manifest clearly to
the petitioner. Their relationship lasted sometime in 2008;

22. That some other manifestations of the psychological and

emotional disturbances on the part of the respondent can be
cited as follows:

a. That there were many times when the respondent

never even kissed the petitioner. Respondent would not even
look at him whenever they spoke with each other. He was
always the one, who holds or hugs her so that they may become
closer to each other but every time he tries to be closer to her,
she simply had to always turn his back to her. This is causing so
much unbearable emotional and psychological pain on the
part of the petitioner;

b. That petitioner told the respondent that they should

discuss what went wrong between them and hopefully they
could work it out again. The respondent just ignored her pleas;

c. The respondent abandoned the petitioner and left to

stay at her parents house. Since October, 2008 or after petitioner
was hospitalized to due to poisoning, the respondent did not
return nor tried to communicate with the petitioner. The
petitioner on several instances, tried to reach the respondent
through his relatives and friends but to no avail.

23. That the petitioner already gave up on the respondent

after trying to give all his efforts just to save his marriage to a
woman who, as shown in the foregoing, is not cognitive to and
psychologically incapable of performing, her basic marital
covenants to herein petitioner;

24. That further, respondent’s psychological incapacity from

all indications appears to have been manifesting at the time of
the celebration of marriage. Although said manifestations were
not then perceived, the root cause shall be proved to such an
extent that respondent could not have known the obligations he
was to fulfill or knowing them could not have validly performed

4
them. It is of such incapacity that respondent was unable to
assume his marital obligations;

25. That the respondent’s incapacity to fulfill her essential

marital obligations appear to be grave, incurable and deeply
ingrained, thus, warranting the issuance of the Decree of Nullity
of petitioner’s marriage with the respondent; and

26. That finally, the petitioner has therefore no other recourse

but to seek judicial relief. The prospects or possibility of
respondent to reform and assume her essential marital
obligations is a remote possibility, if not a hopeless expectancy.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, after trial, it is respectfully prayed that this

Honorable Court rendered judgment:

1. Declaring the marriage entered into by the parties as

NULL and VOID on the ground of psychological incapacity of the
respondent;

2. Ordering the Local Civil Registrar and the National

Statistics Office to cancel in their respective Books of Marriages,
the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent.

Petitioner prays for such other relief she may be entitled to

in the premises.

Diffun, Quirino, 27 November 2018.

Atty. MA. KAREN A. BALDONADO-GUILLERMO

Notary Public
Until December 31, 2019
Doc. No.______; PTR No. 3218465/ 01-03-2018
Page No.______; Lifetime IBP No. 17396/05-20-2017
Book No._____; ROLL No. 67812/05-26-2017
Series of 2018. (MCLE Governing Board Order No. s-2008)
Diffun, Quirino
5
 VERIFICATION-CERTIFICATION
ON NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, ERNESTO M. AGUSTIN, JR, of legal age, Filipino citizen,

resident of Ricarte Sur, Diffun, Quirino, after having been sworn
to in accordance with law, depose and say:

1. That I am the petitioner in the above-entitled case;

2. That I caused the preparation and filing of the foregoing

Petition;

3. That all the allegations therein are true and correct of

my own knowledge and based on authentic records;

4. That I hereby certify under oath that I have not

heretofore commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, Court of
Appeals or any other tribunal or agency, and that to the
best of my knowledge, there is no other action or
proceeding, which is pending before this Honorable Court,
Court of Appeals, Supreme Court or any other tribunal or
agency involving the same parties and the same issues,
and that if I learn hereafter that there are other
proceedings pending before this Honorable Court, or any
other tribunal or agency, I hereby undertake to report that
fact within five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Court.

Diffun, Quirino, 30 November 2018.

ERNESTO M. AGUSTIN, JR
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 30th of

November, 2018 at Diffun, Quirino. Affiant exhibited to me his
___________________.

6
Doc. No. _____;
Page No. _____;
Book No. _____;
Series of 2018.