Short answer. If the petition is sufficient in form and substance, the court issues an order requiring the adverse parties to answer within fifteen days from receipt. The order is served as the court directs, together with copies of the petition and its supporting affidavits.

What the law says

If the petition is sufficient in form and substance to justify relief, the court in which it is filed, shall issue an order requiring the adverse parties to answer the same within fifteen days from the receipt thereof. The order shall be served in such manner as the court may direct, together with copies of the petition and the accompanying affidavits.

Rule 38, Section 4 — Order to file an answer. Read the full provision →

The sufficiency threshold comes first

Before the adverse parties are ever asked to respond, the court in which the petition for relief was filed first checks whether it is sufficient in form and substance to justify relief. Only petitions that clear this initial screening move forward to the next step, so an obviously defective or baseless petition does not automatically drag the other side into answering it. Courts apply this screening precisely because a petition for relief is an extraordinary remedy available only in exceptional circumstances, not a substitute for an appeal that a party simply failed to take on time.

The fifteen-day answer period, and what travels with the order

Once the court is satisfied that the petition passes that threshold, it issues an order requiring the adverse parties to answer within fifteen days from receipt of the order. That order must be served in whatever manner the court directs, and it has to be accompanied by copies of the petition itself and the affidavits that support it, so the adverse parties know exactly what they are being asked to answer. Requiring the supporting affidavits to travel with the order also means the adverse parties are not left guessing at the factual basis for the petition; they can see, from the outset, exactly what fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence is being alleged against them.

Why this screening step exists

Requiring the court to first find the petition sufficient, before the adverse parties are required to respond, means that people who already won a final judgment are not needlessly forced to answer a petition that never had a real chance of succeeding. It is a filter that protects the finality of judgments while still leaving room for genuinely meritorious petitions to proceed. It reflects the broader principle that judgments are meant to become final and executory, and that reopening an already-decided case should never be treated lightly or granted as a matter of course.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.