In a civil case for collection of sum of money, plaintiff Gloria sought to recover ₱2,000,000 from defendant Henry based on an alleged loan evidenced by a promissory note. During trial, Gloria presented the original promissory note and testified that she personally witnessed Henry sign the document in her presence. The promissory note bore what appeared to be Henry's signature. Henry denied executing the promissory note and claimed that the signature was forged. Gloria did not present any handwriting expert or comparison of Henry's signature with his admitted signatures. Instead, she relied on her own testimony that she saw Henry sign the document. Henry's counsel objected to the admission of the promissory note on the ground that it was not properly authenticated because there was no expert testimony on the genuineness of the signature, and Henry had specifically denied executing the document. Should the court sustain the objection and exclude the promissory note from evidence? Explain your answer. (Bar 2026 Syllabus)