This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-06-10 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| The Court is not moved. Respondents should not be penalized for the failure of the notary public to submit his Notarial Report. In Destreza v. Rinoza-Plazo,[25] this Court stated that "the notarized deed of sale should be admitted as evidence despite the failure of the Notary Public in submitting his notarial report to the notarial section of the RTC Manila." The Court expounded: It is the swearing of a person before the Notary Public and the latter's act of signing and affixing his seal on the deed that is material and not the submission of the notarial report. Parties who appear before a notary public to have their documents notarized should not be expected to follow up on the submission of the notarial reports. They should not be made to suffer the consequences of the negligence of the Notary Public in following the procedures prescribed by the Notarial Law.[26] | |||||