Facts:

The case involves Jose de Borja as the petitioner and Fernando Jugo, Judge of the First Instance of Rizal, along with Quintin de Borja, Gregorio J. de Borja, and Francisco de Borja as respondents. The events leading to this case began on May 11, 1928, when Francisco de Borja, Bernardo de Borja, and Marcelo de Borja successfully registered their ownership of a property known as Hacienda de Jalajala in Rizal. In 1930, Quintin de Borja, acting as the administrator of Marcelo de Borja's intestate estate, filed civil case No. 4565 for the partition of the property, which included Francisco and Bernardo as co-owners. The court ruled on October 29, 1931, granting one-third of the property to Francisco de Borja but ordered a survey to delineate the specific areas for each co-owner, which was never completed due to disputes among the parties.

On August 19, 1936, Jose de Borja initiated civil case No. 6598 against Hermogena Romero, Francisco de Borja, and others, seeking to reco...

Facts:

Background of the Case
The petitioner, Jose de Borja, is the son of the respondent Francisco de Borja. The case revolves around the Hacienda de Jalajala, a property declared co-owned by Francisco de Borja, Bernardo de Borja, and Marcelo de Borja in a land registration case (No. 528) in 1928.

Partition Proceedings
In 1930, Quintin de Borja, as administrator of Marcelo de Borja’s estate, filed Civil Case No. 4565 for the partition of the Hacienda de Jalajala. The court adjudicated one-third of the property to Francisco de Borja but failed to specify the areas and boundaries of the portions allotted to each co-owner. A survey was ordered but not carried out due to disputes among the parties.

Petitioner’s Claim
On August 19, 1936, Jose de Borja filed Civil Case No. 6598 against Francisco de Borja and others, claiming ownership of portions of the Hacienda de Jalajala based on a deed of sale allegedly executed by Francisco de Borja in his favor. The deed of sale (Annex A-l of Exhibit A) stated that Francisco de Borja sold his share of the property to Jose de Borja in consideration of a debt of P40,423.70.

Francisco de Borja’s Defense
Francisco de Borja categorically denied the authenticity of the deed of sale, claiming it was forged and spurious. He asserted that he never sold his share of the property to Jose de Borja and that the latter had neither advanced any funds for the administration of the hacienda nor amassed the substantial amount he claimed to have loaned.

Petitioner’s Attempt to Intervene
Jose de Borja sought to intervene in Civil Case No. 4565 (the partition case) on August 19, 1936, more than five years after the judgment in that case had been rendered. His intervention was denied by the respondent judge, Fernando Jugo, prompting Jose de Borja to file a mandamus proceeding to compel the judge to allow his intervention.

Issue:

1. Whether the respondent judge abused his discretion in denying Jose de Borja’s motion to intervene in Civil Case No. 4565.
2. Whether Jose de Borja has a clear and legal right to intervene in the partition case.
3. Whether mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel the judge to allow the intervention.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)