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.”
