MICHAEL & CO. VS.

ENRIQUEZ
33 SCRA 87 December 24, 1915

Facts:
The petitioner, E. Michael and Co. claims to be a successor of a sale with a right to
repurchase made by Adriano Enriquez in favor of E. Michael and E. Michael & Co. by virtue of an
instrument, duly executed and delivered to it, transferring property, business and assets of any kind
including the land subject of this litigation. It alleged that the expiration of the right to repurchase…
thus, the consolidation of ownership in the petitioner company. During the trial, MCI attempted to
prove two things which the trial court prevented it from doing:

(1) the execution and delivery of the conveyance transferring to it the land in question

(2) the fact that the instrument so executed and delivered was lost.

Although it was conceded that there were questions were questions, however, which were
well framed and whose answers should be allowed, the trial court nevertheless sustained
objections to it and the evidence sought to be adduced was excluded. Thus, when the CFI of Cebu
dismissed the case on the ground of lack of cause of action, the petitioner company filed this appeal.

Issue:
Whether or not the trial court erred in preventing MCI from proving existence and the
delivery of the conveyance transferring to it the land in question.

Ruling:
No. The Trial Court do well in refusing at all times to permit the introduction of
incompetent evidence and particularly secondary evidence of the contents of written instruments
unless the facts required by the Code of Civil Procedure as the conditions precedent for such
evidence are clearly shown to exist. If it has been lost, proof of the loss must first be made before
evidence can be given of its contents. Upon such proof being made, together with proof of the due
execution of the writing, its contents may be proved by a copy or by a recital of its contents in some.
As will be seen in this section, the writing itself must be produced unless it has been lost or
destroyed in which case, before its contents may be proved by other evidence, it must be shown by
the party offering secondary evidence that:

1.) that the document was duly executed and delivered, where delivery is necessary,
2.) that it has been lost or destroyed.

The execution or delivery of the document maybe established by the person or persons,
who executed it, by the person before whom its execution was acknowledged, or by any person
who was present and saw it executed and delivered or who, after its execution and delivery, saw it
and recognized the signatures or by a person to whom the parties to the instruments have
previously confessed the execution thereof. The destruction of the instrument may be proved by
any person knowing the fact. The loss may be shown by any person who knew the fact of its loss, or
by anyone who has made, in the judgment of the court, a sufficient examination in the place or
places where the document or pares of similar character are usually kept by the person in whose
custody the document lost was, and has been unable to find it or who has made any other
investigation which is sufficient to satisfy the Court that the document was indeed lost. If it appears,
on an attempt to prove the loss, that the document is in fact in existence, then the proof of loss or
destruction fails and secondary evidence is inadmissible unless section 322 of the Civil code of
Procedure should be applicable. After proper proof of the due execution and delivery and its loss or
destruction, oral evidence maybe given of its contents by any person who signed the document, or
who read it, or heard it read knowing, or it being proved from other sources, that the document so
read was the one in question. Such evidence may also be given by any person who was present
when the contents of the document was being talked over between the parties thereto to such an
extent as to give him reasonably full information as to its contents or the contents maybe proved by
any person to whom the parties to the instrument have confessed or stated the contents thereof[ or
by a copy thereof or by a recital of its contents in some authentic document.