Case Digest (G.R. No. 23451)
Facts:
- The case involves a suit to foreclose a real mortgage on property owned by the defendant, Josefa Moran.
- The plaintiff, Juan Sumulong, is the administrator of the estate of Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera, deceased.
- The defendant admits the indebtedness but seeks to recover from the plaintiff on a counterclaim.
- Consuelo Legarda filed a bill of intervention, claiming a second mortgage on the same property.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff and affirmed the judgment rendered in their favor. The defendant's admission of the debt and the execution of the mortgage to secure its payment were considered. The court also found no merit in the special defenses alleged in the defendant's answer. However, the court decl...(Unlock)
Ratio:
The court based its decision on Section 121 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which states that a party seeking to intervene in a foreclosure suit must first obtain permission from the court. After obtaining permission, the intervenor must file and serve a copy of their bill of intervention on all adverse parties.
- The record showed that the defendant was not served with notice of the motion for a bill of intervention, nor was sh...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 23451)
Facts:
The case of Sumulong v. Moran involves a suit to foreclose a real mortgage. The plaintiff, Juan Sumulong, as the administrator of the estate of Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera, filed the suit against the defendant, Josefa Moran, who is the administratrix of the estate of Mariano Lim. The defendant admits the indebtedness but seeks to recover from the plaintiff on a counterclaim. Additionally, Consuelo Legarda filed a bill of intervention, seeking judgment against the defendant for a separate claim secured by a second mortgage on the same property.
Issue:
The main issues raised in the case are whether the court erred in admitting and taking cognizance of the intervention, and whether the court exceeded its jurisdiction in rendering judgment for the intervenor.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff and affirmed the judgment in their favor. The court found that there w...