Case 10: WESTMONT INVESTMENT CORPORATION (WINCORP) vs. AMOS P. FRANCIA, JR. et al. (G.R. No. 194128, December 7, 2011)

Facts: The Francias invested their money in Wincorp for 11% interest for 43 days. They failed to collect upon maturity and their investment were rolled over for another 34 days for which Confirmation Advices were issued by Wincorp indicating Pearlbank as the actual borrower of the funds invested. Failing again to collect, the Francias filed a collection suit against Wincorp and respondent Pearlbank before the RTC. Wincorp did not object or comment to the evidence offered by the Francias and filed a motion to postpone hearing 3 days before the scheduled hearing for presentation of Wincorp’s defense evidence which was denied. RTC considered Wincorp to have waive its right to present evidence. It held Wincorp solely liable to the Francias and dismissed the case against Pearlbank. CA affirmed. Hence, this petition.

Issue: Was the CA correct in not admitting the documents attached to Wincorp’s pleadings?

Held: Yes. It appears that Wincorp was given ample opportunity to file its Comment/Objection to the formal offer of evidence of the Francias but it chose not to file any. All the documents attached by Wincorp to its pleadings before the CA cannot be given any weight or evidentiary value for the sole reason that, as correctly observed by the CA, these documents were not formally offered as evidence in the trial court. To consider them now would deny the other parties the right to examine and rebut them. This is in accordance with Section 34, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court