REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
CALAMBA CITY

ERNESTO T.LARA, NPS DOCKET NO. 1V-12 – INV. 18K- 02559

Complainant,
FOR: FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENT
Versus
PROSECUTOR: HON. NELSON C. DITAN
FERDINAND T. LARA,
BOB SALANDANAN and
NITA N. PRIZADO,
Respondents.
X---------------x
COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT

I, FERDINAND E. LARA, of legal age, Filipino citizen, married and a resident of Bargy. Balibago,
Sta. Rosa City, Laguna, Philippines, after being duly sworn to hereby depose and say:

1. That I am the same FERDINAND E. LARA, who is charged together with BOB SALANDANAN
and NITA N. PRIZADO, with falsification of public document filed by ERNESTO T. LARA;

2. That I deny that I committed falsification of public document in connection with the deed of
donation executed by my mother LEONILA T. ESTEBAN in my favor, attached to the affidavit
complaint;

3. That my participation in the execution of the deed of donation was merely to accept the
donation in my favor;

4. That my presence before the Notary Public wasnot required; only the DONOR Leonila T.
Esteban was required to be present before the Notary Public;

Thus, the ACKNOWLEDGMENT of the Deed of Donation states:

“ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before me, a Notary Public for and in Pasay City, this 7thg day of January 2014,
Personally appeared Leonila T. Esteban with her TIN No. (not legible), issued on
(not legible) known to me to be the same person who executed the foregoing
Instrument - - - - -“

5. That I never made it appear before the Notary Public that the same 803 Square meter
parcel of land was donated to me earlier than 03 December 2015, for I did not appear before the
Notary Public; my presence was not required; there is no evidence or proof to establish that I made it
appear to the Notary Public that the same property was donated to me earlier than 03 December 2015.
The same is a mere opinion of Ernesto T. Lara, an opinion which does not amount to a probable cause
for falsification of public document;

6. That no payment was made for the documentary stamp of the Deed of Absolute Sale in
favor of complainantErnesto T. Lara, and for this reason the Deed of Absolute Sale in his favor could
not be admitted in evidence. Thus Section 201 of the Internal Revenue Code states:
 2

“Section 201. Effect of failure to stamp taxable document. – An instrument,

document or paper which is required by law to be stamped and which has been
signed, issued, accepted or transferred without being duly stamped, shall not be
recorded, nor shall it or any copy thereof or any record of transfer of the same be
admitted or used in evidence in any court until the requisite stamps shall have
been affixed thereto and canceled.”

7. That the Donor later on caused me to sign my acceptance of the donation, and this fact
of late acceptance of the donation does not matter, for according to the Civil Code, the acceptance
must be made during the lifetime of the donor and of the donee. Article 746 of the Civil Code states:

“ Art. 746. Civil Code. Acceptance must be made during the lifetime
of the donor and of the done.”

8. That the DONOR LEONILA T. ESTEBAN executed an AFFIDAVIT which she swore before a
Filipino Consulin the Consular Office to the effect that she did not issue a Deed of Absolute Sale for the
same property as the Deed of Donation to and in favor of ERNESTO T. LARA, the complainant in this
case, and that she never received a single centavo out of what is stated in the Deed of Absolute Sale, a
xerox copy of the said affidavit is hereto attached as Annex 1 hereof;

9. That there is no proof or evidence to support the allegation of complainant that the Deed of
Donation was executed only in 2018 and not on January 7, 2014. It is a mere opinion of complainant
which does not amount to probable cause;

10. That as to the date and year in which the deed of donation was executed, the best
evidence is the document itself, the deed of donation; the deed of donation does not bear any erasure
or insertion;

11. That the DONOR is not impleaded in the complaint, if this case involves falsification of
public document, the person who is most guilty is the DONOR who executed the deed donation and who
appeared before the NOTARY PUBLIC; but to repeat. the DONOR is not impleaded. It seems that the
complainant was motivated by malice in filing the instant case;

12. That in the hearing of this case on March 4, 2019 at 2:00 P.M. before an Assistant City
Prosecutor of the City of Calamba, complainant ERNESTO E. LARA presented the supposed original
of a Deed of Absolute Sale which is annex C to this affidavit-complaint, and it was found out that the
last words of the ACKNOWLEDGMENT was erased without a signature and in it was superimposed the
words CITY OF STA. ROSA WHILE THE XEROX COPY OF THE DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE, the words city of
Binan were used. It is very apparent that the Deed of Absolute Sale is a forgery;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ___ day of March 2019 at Calamba
City, Laguna, Philippines.
FERDINAND E. LARA
- Affiant-

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this ____ day of March 2019 at Calamba City,
Laguna, Philippines.
HON. NELSON C. DITAN
Assistant City Fiscal