MILAGROS MANONGSONG, etc., et. al. vs. FELOMENA
JUMAQUIO ESTIMO, et. al., G.
R. No. 136773, June 25, 2003
“x x x.
The Kasulatan,
being a document acknowledged before a notary public, is a public document and prima facie evidence of its authenticity and due
execution. To assail the
authenticity and due execution of a notarized document, the evidence must be
clear, convincing and more than merely preponderant.[24] Otherwise the authenticity and due
execution of the document should be upheld.[25] The trial court itself held that (n)o
countervailing proof was adduced by plaintiffs to overcome or impugn the documents
legality or its validity.[26]
Even if the Kasulatan was not notarized, it would be
deemed an ancient document and thus still presumed to be authentic. TheKasulatan is: (1) more than 30 years old, (2)
found in the proper custody, and (3) unblemished by any alteration or by any
circumstance of suspicion. It
appears, on its face, to be genuine.[27]
X x x.”
