G.R. No. 48226 - Ang vs. Teodoro

The Spouses Elmer and Mila Soriano, owners of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 162098 in Barrio Bagbagan, Muntinlupa City, intended to sell the property to one of their sisters.
To assess the tax due from the sale, the owner’s copy of the title was entrusted to Susan Manito by Marciana Reyes (sister of Mila Soriano) in February 2006, but the document was never returned.
Later, Marciana Reyes discovered from third parties that the title had been used as collateral by Gaila Montero in connection with a mortgage transaction.

On March 8, 2006, a Deed of Mortgage was registered as Entry No. 64418 on the property’s title, purportedly evidencing a loan of ₱60,000.00 from Montero.

The Spouses Soriano denied having executed this deed and asserted that the signatures on the document differed from their actual signatures.
They also pointed out inconsistencies in the Community Tax Certificates included in the acknowledgment portion, noting that the certificates originated from the City of Manila even though they were residents of Molino, Cavite.

On August 16, 2006, a Supplemental to the Deed of Mortgage, recorded as Entry No. 64467 and notarized by respondent Arca, purportedly evidenced an additional loan of ₱200,000.00 using the same property as collateral.

Again, the Spouses Soriano denied ever authorizing such a supplemental mortgage or having appeared before the notary public to execute the document.

Subsequent to these entries, the Spouses Soriano filed a civil case for the recovery of the owner’s duplicate TCT and for the nullification of the mortgages; they also effected the annotation of a Notice of Lis Pendens under Entry No. 64808.

Denied notarizing the Deed of Mortgage and alleged that the Spouses Soriano never appeared before him on the said date.
Asserted that his notarial commission in Manila had expired (effective June 4, 2005) and that he was already operating under a new commission in Makati from June 21, 2005 to December 31, 2006.

Admitted to notarizing the contested documents but refuted the Spouses’ claims that they never personally appeared before him and that their signatures were forged.
Argued that by seeking the revocation of the mortgages, the Spouses implicitly acknowledged their validity, and maintained that disciplinary matters involving his conduct as a notary public fall under the jurisdiction of the Executive Judge, not the Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD).

An Investigating Commissioner of the CBD of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) recommended:

Dismissal of the complaint against Ortiz for insufficiency of evidence.
Suspension from the practice of law for one (1) year, revocation of the notarial commission (if any), and disqualification from reappointment as notary public for two (2) years against Arca.

The Board of Governors (BOG) of the IBP initially approved the recommendations with slight modifications, later reverting to the investigator’s original recommendations after further consideration.
Respondent Arca filed a Petition for Review, contending that the penalty should be mitigated on the ground that his infraction related merely to his functions as notary public and was his first offense, proposing a lighter sanction.

Whether the alleged notarization of mortgage documents by Atty. Roberto B. Arca—conducted without the personal appearance of the Spouses Soriano and with signatures claimed to be forged—amounts to breach of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice and the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Whether the complaint against Atty. Gervacio B. Ortiz, Jr. should be dismissed for insufficiency of evidence based on his assertion of non-participation in the execution of the questioned documents due to the expiration of his notarial commission in the relevant jurisdiction.

Whether the disciplinary penalty imposed on Atty. Roberto B. Arca (suspension from the practice of law for one year, revocation of his notarial commission, and two-year disqualification from reappointment as notary public) is appropriate in light of existing jurisprudence, including the cases of Tabas, Soriano v. Atty. Basco, and Father Aquino v. Atty. Pascua, as well as Arca’s contention for a lighter penalty as his first offense.