G.R. No. L-1355; October 12, 1949
LUCIO PALANCA CHILIANCHIN, plaintiff-appellant, vs. EUSEBIO COQUINCO, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

Plaintiff Lucio Palanca Chilianchin mortgaged a property on July 30, 1941, to secure a loan. The mortgage was foreclosed in 1942 due to non-payment of interest. During the appeal of the foreclosure case, plaintiff’s son, Carlos Palanca, acting under a power of attorney dated September 2, 1941, sold the property to defendant Eusebio Coquinco on September 15, 1943, using the proceeds to pay the mortgage debt. After the war, plaintiff filed an action to recover the property, alleging that the power of attorney was forged, as he was in Negros Occidental when it was supposedly executed and acknowledged before a notary public in Manila.

ISSUE

Whether the power of attorney executed in favor of Carlos Palanca is authentic or a forgery.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment, upholding the authenticity of the power of attorney. The notarial acknowledgment created a strong presumption of due execution, which the plaintiff failed to rebut with sufficient evidence. The plaintiff’s denial and the testimony of witnesses were deemed insufficient to overcome the presumption, especially considering the notary’s certification, the circumstances of the foreclosure case, and the plaintiff’s own conduct. Therefore, the sale of the property by Carlos Palanca as attorney-in-fact was valid.

AI Generated by Armztrong.