Case Summary (A.M. No. P-18-3902)
Allegations of Misconduct
The complainant asserts that she is the rightful owner of Lot No. 3507, based on a Declaration of Heirship with Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate executed by her siblings in February 2005. After discovering that someone else, Serena Garaygay, had paid the real estate taxes on the property, she found an undated document purportedly signed by her brother Jose G. Roa and notarized by the respondent. The complainant claims this signature was forged, as it did not match any legitimate versions of Jose's signature.
Document Discrepancies
Upon further investigation, the complainant confirmed with the National Archives of the Philippines that there was no record of the document notarized by the respondent. Instead, the National Archives provided evidence of a different document with the same notarization references, raising doubts about the authenticity of the notarized document.
Respondent's Defense
In response to the allegations, the respondent denied forging any documents and claimed that Jose G. Roa did appear before him for notarization. He argued that the notarized document simply reaffirmed an earlier deed of absolute sale concerning the property. Respondent further contended that errors in the notarial recording were made in good faith and did not undermine the document's validity. He stated that the authenticity of the notarized document was, at that time, under dispute in Civil Case No. 1694 in the Regional Trial Court.
IBP Commission Findings
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Commission recommended revoking the respondent's notarial commission for a period of two years, while asserting that he did not engage in falsification but failed in maintaining accurate notarial records. The commission emphasized that a notary must faithfully keep their notarial books in order, as prescribed by Section 2, Rule VI of the Rules on Notarial Practice. This inadequacy was deemed to compromise the integrity expected of a notary public.
Court's Ruling
The Court acknowledged the findings of the IBP but modified the penalties imposed by the IBP Board. The judicial ruling emphasized the significant public interest inherent in the duties of a notary public, underscoring their obligation to accurately execute and record notarial acts. Failure to do so jeopardizes public confidence in notarized documents, which are presumed to be valid and genuine.
Violations of Notarial Duties
The Court noted that the respondent's failure to fully record the necessary details in his notarial book constituted gross negligence, a failure that under
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. P-18-3902)
Case Background
- The complaint was filed by Johaida Garina Roa-Buenafe against Atty. Aaron R. Lirazan for grave misconduct, specifically for allegedly notarizing and falsifying a public document.
- The complainant claimed ownership of Lot No. 3507, which is covered by Tax Declaration No. 1447, measuring 11,530 square meters, acquired through a Declaration of Heirship with Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate.
- The Declaration was executed by her siblings on February 15, 2005, relinquishing their inheritance claims over the property.
- Despite being diligent in paying real estate taxes, the complainant was surprised in 2008 to find that a certain Serena Garaygay had also paid taxes for the same property.
Allegations of Misconduct
- Upon investigation, the complainant discovered an undated document titled "Conformity," which was signed by her brother Jose G. Roa and notarized by the respondent.
- The notarization bore notarial details indicating it was recorded in the notarial book of the respondent.
- The complainant alleged that the signature of Jose was forged and did not match his known signatures on official documents.
Respondent's Defense
- Atty. Lirazan denied the allegations, claiming that Jose had personally appeared before him to notarize the document.
- He asserted that the document affirmed a preceding deed of absolute sale concerning the property.
- The respondent maintained that any error in the notarial records was due to his secretary's mistake, whi