"xxx.
In addition, the requirement of clear and convincing proof in ousting the presumption of genuineness and due execution of a public document is further echoed in Bernardo v. Court of Appeals,113 viz.:
It is a fact that the transaction between private respondent and the spouses Bernardo was reduced into writing by way of a document denominated "Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage." This document, admitted as signed by private respondent and his wife, was duly notarized by Notary Public Pedro B. Binuya and had two instrumental witnesses. Being a notarized document, it had in its favor the presumption of regularity, and to overcome the same, there must be evidence that is clear, convincing and more than merely preponderant; otherwise the document should be upheld.
The question that must be addressed, therefore, is: Was the evidence presented by private respondent against the Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage clear, convincing and more than merely preponderant? We do not think so.
Far from being clear and convincing, all that private respondent offered by way of evidence was his and his wife's mere denial that they had intended to sell the subject land. Such bare and unsubstantiated denial will not suffice to overcome the positive presumption of the due execution of the subject Deed, being a notarized document. Indeed, when the evidence is conflicting, the public document must still be upheld.114chanRoblesvirtualLawl
Xxx."
G.R. No. 220916, June 14, 2021
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. CAMILO CAMENFORTE AND ROBERT LASTRILLA, Respondents.
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2021junedecisions.php?id=757
No comments:
Post a Comment