Document not formally offered, per Rule 132; effect as to admissibility.

MILAGROS MANONGSONG, etc., et. al. vs. FELOMENA JUMAQUIO ESTIMO, et. al., G. R. No. 136773, June 25, 2003

“x x x.

We find no error in the Court of Appeals refusal to give any probative value to the alleged birth certificate of Guevarra and the affidavit of Benjamin dela Cruz, Sr. Petitioners belatedly attached these documents to their appellees brief. Petitioners could easily have offered these documents during the proceedings before the trial court. Instead, petitioners presented these documents for the first time on appeal without any explanation. For reasons of their own, petitioners did not formally offer in evidence these documents before the trial court as required by Section 34, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court.^[33] To admit these documents now is contrary to due process, as it deprives respondents of the opportunity to examine and controvert them.

Moreover, even if these documents were admitted, they would not controvert Navarros ownership of the Property. Benjamin dela Cruz, Sr.s affidavit stated merely that, although he knew Navarro by name, he was not personally acquainted with her.^[34]Guevarras alleged birth certificate casts doubt only as to whether Navarro was indeed the mother of Guevarra. These documents do not prove that Guevarra owned the Property or that Navarro did not own the Property.

X  x x.”