Case Digest (G.R. No. L-209)
Facts:
G. Viola Fernando v. Crisanto Aragon, Gregorio Nieva, and Maria A. de Nieva, G.R. No. L-209, April 30, 1946, the Supreme Court, Ozaeta, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner G. Viola Fernando was one of the defendants in an unlawful detainer action filed by plaintiffs Gregorio Nieva and Maria A. de Nieva in the Municipal Court of Manila; Crisanto Aragon was the presiding municipal judge and is named as a respondent in the present petition. The plaintiffs alleged that on April 21, 1945 they leased to Fernando one of three houses in a compound on a month-to-month basis starting May 1, 1945, at P200 monthly, with a clause permitting either party to terminate the lease on thirty days' notice and a proviso forbidding commercial use or transfer/sublease without plaintiffs' written consent.
The complaint alleged that Fernando converted part of the premises into an automobile repair shop and subleased portions without permission, causing nuisance and depreciation of adjacent buildings; plaintiffs averred they notified Fernando in writing on May 25, 1945 of their intention to terminate the lease as of June 30, 1945, later granted him an extension until July 31, 1945 to vacate, and that he nevertheless refused to surrender the premises. At trial the municipal judge had just dismissed a similar case for failure to allege a demand and failure to pay rent as required by section 2 of Rule 72; in response plaintiffs' counsel obtained leave to amend paragraph 8 of the complaint by adding that the defendant refused to vacate "despite several requests made on him since July 31, 1945, and until the date of the filing of this action."
Petitioner then filed a writ of certiorari in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Manila seeking to vacate the municipal court proceedings on the ground that the municipal judge had no jurisdiction to allow the amendment. The CFI denied the petition, holding that the municipal judge did not exceed his jurisdiction in permitting the amendment. Petiti...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Municipal Court of Manila exceed its jurisdiction in permitting the plaintiffs to amend the complaint during trial?
- Was the amendment to the complaint material to the cause of action for unlawful detainer, or was it unnecessary/surplusage given the or...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)