EVIDENCE Secondary Evidence Municipality of Victoria v. CA, GR L-31189, 1987

 Municipality of Victoria v. CA, GR L-31189, 1987

Doctrine: Pursuant to the Best Evidence Rule, in lieu of a Deed of Sale evidencing the sale of a parcel of land, a certificate issued by the Archives Division of the Bureau of Records Management in Manila which shows, the nature of the instrument, the subject of the sale, the parties of the contract, the consideration, the names of the witness and the date of the sale is sufficient in proving the contents of the same Deed of Sale.

FACTS: A parcel of land owned by one Gonzalo Ditching deceased was inherited by his granddaughter Norma Leuenberger, herein private respondent.Thereafter Leuenberger discovered that a part of the land she inherited was being utilized by the Municipality of Victorias, herein petitioner, as a burial and cemetery ground.

This prompted Leuenberger to write to the Mayor of Victorias demanding the payment of past rentals and requesting the delivery of the parcel of land allegedly illegally occupied by Victorias. The Mayor replied that Victorias brought the land from Ditching but the Deed of Absolute Sale was lost. This prompted Leuenberger to file a complaint before the trial court for the recovery of possession of the parcel of land occupied by Victorias and was being utilized as a cemetery.

The trial court decided in favour of Victorias and dismissed the complaint. On appeal, the CA reversed the trial court and held that Victorias is liable for rentals and the return of the parcel of land. Now, Victorias assails the decision of the CA before the SC, it argues that a certificate in lieu of the DAS, and as secondary evidence, is admissible in evidence to prove the contents of the DAS which in turn evidences the sale of the parcel of land by Ditching in favour of Victorias, hence this petition.

ISSUE: WHETHER THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ARCHIVES DIVISION OF THE BUREAU OF RECORDS MANAGEMENT IN MANILA MAY BE ADMITTED AS EVIDENCE IN LIEU OF THE DAS PURSUANT TO THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE?

HELD: YES. *See Stated Doctrine* It is beyond question that the foregoing certificate is an authentic document clearly corroborated and supported by:

(a)     The testimony of the municipal councilor of Victorias, Ricardo Suarez, who negotiated the sale;

(b)     The testimony of Emilio Cuesta, the municipal treasurer of said municipality, since 1932 up to the date of trial on September 14, 1964, who personally paid the amount of P750.00 to Felipe Leuenberger as consideration of the Contract of Sale;

(c)     Certificate of Settlement "as evidence of said payment;"

(d)    Tax Declaration No. 429 which was cancelled and was substituted by Tax Declaration No. 3600 covering the portion of the property unsold; and

(e)     Tax Declaration No. 3601 in the name of the Municipal Government of Victorias covering the portion occupied as cemetery.