5.

Jabalde vs PNB
Facts:
Jabalde seeks for reimbursement allegedly deposited by him with PNB
on 1941 and 1943 in mixed Philippines currency and Japanese military
noted. Defendants answer was not under oath, it admits making the
deposit but denies the dates on it. PNB allege that 1944 were the true
and actual dates of deposits and that the plaintiff altered them
maliciously and these were all military noted. Defendant presented
expert hand writing witness. The case was dismissed in favor of PNB
Jabalde averred that if there was tampering, it should be attributed to
the personnel of PNB.
Issue: Whether the Banks failure to deny under oath the entries in the
passbook as copied in the complaint constitutes an admission and due
execution of the document.
Ruling:
Such rule cannot apply to the present case because plaintiff offered no
objection during the trial to the testimonies of defendants witnesses and
documentary evidence showing different dates of deposit. By these acts,
the plaintiff waived the defendants technical admission through failure
to deny under oath the genuineness and due execution of the document.