Facts:
Felicito Sanson filed a special proceeding for the settlement of the estate of Juan See. Sanson claimed that the deceased was indebted to him in the amount of Php 603, 000.00 and to his sister Caledonia Sanson-Saquin in the amount of Php 320,000.00. also petitioner Eduardo Montinola and his mother filed separate claims against the estate alleging that the deceased owed them Php50,000 and Php 150, 000, respectively. During the trial, Caledonia and Felicito Sanson testified that they had transaction with the deceased evidenced by six checks issued by the deceased before he died and that after his death, Felicito and Caledonia presented the checks to the bank for payment but were dishonored due to the closure of the account. The same transaction happened to Eduardo and Angeles Montionola but when they presented the check to the bank, it was dishonored. Demand letters were sent to the heirs of the deceased but the checks remained unsettled.
Issue:
Whether or not presumption of consideration may be rebutted even if the heirs did not present any evidence to controvert it.
Held:
When the fact was established by a witness that it was the deceased who signed the checks and in fact who entered into the transaction, the genuineness of the deceased signature having been shown, the latter is prima facie presumed to have been a party to the check for value, following Section 24 of NIL which provides that “every negotiable instrument is deemed prima facie to have been issued for a valuable consideration; and every person whose signature appears thereon to have become a party thereto for value.”
Since the prima facie presumption was not rebutted or contradicted by the heirs, it has become conclusive.
