GR L 13501; (March, 1960) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-13501; April 28, 1960
JOSE V. VILLASIN, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SEVEN-UP BOTTLING COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES, CEBU BRANCH, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The case originated in the Justice of the Peace Court of Mandaue, Cebu, where plaintiff Jose V. Villasin filed a complaint to recover P1,329.91, plus interest, attorney’s fees, and costs. Defendant Seven-Up Bottling Company filed an answer with a counterclaim for P1,273.70, actual damages of P500, and attorney’s fees of P500. The justice of the peace court rendered a decision on March 16, 1956, finding insufficient evidence for the counterclaim and ordering defendant to pay plaintiff the claimed amount. Defendant appealed to the Court of First Instance of Cebu, where it filed an answer on April 23, 1956, reproducing its earlier counterclaim (now stated as P1,283.10, plus P500 actual damages and P500 attorney’s fees, totaling P2,283.10). Plaintiff moved to dismiss the counterclaim on March 8, 1957, citing “lack of appellate jurisdiction” because the counterclaim exceeded the original jurisdiction of the justice of the peace court, thus placing it beyond the appellate jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance. The Court of First Instance granted the motion and dismissed the counterclaim by order dated May 2, 1957, relying on cited jurisprudence. Defendant appealed this order.
ISSUE
Whether the order of the Court of First Instance dismissing the defendant’s counterclaim is immediately appealable.
RULING
No. The appeal is dismissed. The order dated May 2, 1957, is interlocutory in nature, as it did not terminate the litigation but left the merits of plaintiff’s complaint to be heard and decided. Under Section 2, Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, no interlocutory or incidental order is subject to appeal until a final judgment is rendered. The propriety of the order may only be reviewed after the Court of First Instance issues a judgment on the merits of the complaint. The appeal was prematurely taken and should not have been given due course. Costs are assessed against defendant-appellant.