Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 1 times or more.

	GR No. 194014 2012-09-12	PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. SPS. ALEJANDRO AND MYRNA REBLANDO VELASCO JR., J.
Respondents parlayed and the CA acquiesced with the argument that the BDC owned Lot No. 10 when mortgaged to the PNB, and that they were mere applicants out to buy the lot. The records, however, are bereft of evidence, other than respondents' bare and self-serving assertion, to support their contention about being mere applicants in a social housing project at the time and that Lot No. 10 was, indeed, government property. And as may be noted, TD No. 38950 over Lot No. 10 in the name of the Ministry of Human Settlements, which should otherwise lend proof to the Ministry ownership of the lot had, as of 1990, already been cancelled; and in lieu of it, TD No. 59006[39] was issued in Alejandro's name, two (2) years prior to the constitution of the REM. Well-settled is the rule that "[b]are and unsubstantiated allegations do not constitute substantial evidence and have no probative value."[40]