G.R. No. 138084. April 10, 2002 MALAYAN INSURANCE CO., INC., petitioner, vs.

PHILIPPINE NAILS AND WIRES CORPORA ION, respondent. !AC S" PNWC insured its shipment of tons of steel billets with Malayan. The shipment delivered was short. Hence, PNWC claimed insuramce. Malayan refused to pay. PNWC filed a complaint for the said lost and/or delivered car o !TC " ruled in favor of PNWC Malayan appealed to C# contendin that$ the trial court erred in renderin %ud ment by default notwithstandin that issues were %oined by petitioner&s filin of an answer' in awardin dama es to respondent based on unauthenticated documentary evidence and hearsay' and in admittin documentary evidence which is irre ular in nature and not in accordance with the !ules of Court. C# " #ffirmed !TC " !uled that$ !TC did not abuse its discretion because petitioner answered way beyond the prescribed period' (eanne )in , the witness of PNWC, was a competent witness because she personally prepared the documentary evidence and had personal *nowled e of the alle ations in the complaint. M! " +enied' Hence, this petition. Malayans contention$ (eanne )in &s testimony was hearsay because she had no personal *nowled e of the e,ecution of the documents supportin PNWC&s cause of action, such as the sales contract, invoice, pac*in list, bill of ladin , -.- !eport, and the Marine Car o Policy' that even thou h )in was personally assi ned to handle and monitor the importation of PNWC this cannot be e/uated with personal *nowled e of the facts' and that even thou h she personally prepared the summary of wei ht of steel billets received by respondent, she did not have personal *nowled e of the wei ht of steel billets actually shipped and delivered. ISSUE" W0N the testimony of PNWC&s sole witness is hearsay RULING" (eanne )in , who was assi ned to handle PNWC&s importations, includin their insurance covera e, has personal *nowled e of the volume of steel billets bein imported, and therefore competent to testify thereon. Her testimony is not hearsay. Ho#$%$r, she is not /ualified to testify on the shorta e in the delivery of the imported steel billets. -he did not have personal *nowled e of the actual steel billets received. 1ven thou h she prepared the summary of the received steel billets, she based the summary only on the receipts prepared by other persons. Her testimony on steel billets received was hearsay. 2t has no probative value even if not ob%ected to at the trial. Petition is .!#NT1+.