G.R. No. 101761 - National Sugar Refineries Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission

The case arose from a collection action instituted in the City Court of Manila.
The plaintiff-appellee, Firestone Tire and Rubber Company of the Philippines, initiated the suit against defendant Fernando Tempongko.
During the course of the proceedings, the defendant obtained leave from the court to file a third-party complaint against Antonio Luna, who became the third-party defendant.

Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff-appellee against defendant Tempongko.
The defendant was ordered to pay P1,992.40 (representing the principal account), P200.00 stipulated interest up to January 31, 1964, and thereafter 1% interest per month until full payment is made; in addition, P400.00 for attorney’s fees and other costs of the suit.

Judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant (acting as third-party plaintiff) against the third-party defendant, Antonio Luna.
The third-party defendant was ordered to pay to the third-party plaintiff whatever amount the latter was ordered to pay the plaintiff in the case, plus P200.00 as attorney’s fees.

Only the third-party defendant (Antonio Luna) appealed the judgment rendered against him in the third-party complaint.
When the records reached the Court of First Instance of Manila, the plaintiff-appellee filed a Motion to Remand Case for the execution of its judgment against defendant Tempongko.
The plaintiff-appellee argued that because defendant Tempongko failed to appeal the injury inflicted by the City Court’s decision, its judgment against him had become final and executory, notwithstanding the appeal by the third-party defendant.
The Court of First Instance granted the motion, ordering that the judgment against Fernando Tempongko be executed, while for trial de novo the records be sent back to handle issues related solely to the third-party complaint.

Whether the judgment rendered in the collection action against defendant Fernando Tempongko becomes final and executory despite only the third-party defendant (Antonio Luna) having appealed the corresponding judgment on the third-party complaint.

Whether the third-party complaint, as raised by the defendant who acted as a third-party plaintiff, constitutes a proper or effective defense to the original complaint brought by the plaintiff-appellee.
Whether an appeal by a third party from a judgment in its favor has the effect of vacating the entire judgment in the case or only the part that directly affects the appealing party.
The applicability of established case law, particularly the ruling in Singh vs. Liberty Insurance Corporation, regarding the finality of judgments when only part of the parties appeal.