G.R. No. L-2062; August 11, 1949
JESUS B. LOPEZ, petitioner, vs. RAFAEL DINGLASAN, LINO GUTIERREZ, GUILLERMO CABRERA, and SHERIFF OF MANILA, respondents.

FACTS

In an unlawful detainer case in the Manila municipal court, the parties submitted a compromise agreement. Judge Cabrera rendered a judgment approving and ordering compliance with the agreement. Petitioner Lopez considered this judgment non-appealable. Later, respondent Gutierrez moved for execution, alleging violations. Judge Cabrera granted execution. Lopez filed a certiorari petition with the Court of First Instance (Judge Dinglasan) to challenge the execution, including a prayer for a preliminary injunction. Judge Dinglasan denied the preliminary injunction. Lopez filed a notice of appeal from this denial, but Judge Dinglasan disallowed it, holding the order was interlocutory. Lopez then filed this petition for mandamus to compel Judge Dinglasan to approve the appeal and forward the record, and to seek a preliminary injunction from the Supreme Court to restrain execution.

ISSUE

Whether a writ of mandamus lies to compel Judge Dinglasan to approve an appeal from his interlocutory order denying a preliminary injunction in a certiorari case.

RULING

No. The petition is dismissed. An order denying a preliminary injunction is interlocutory and not appealable under Section 2, Rule 41 of the Rules of Court. Interlocutory orders are not subject to appeal until a final judgment is rendered. The parties’ stipulation to treat the case as an appeal on the merits was improper, as it would have the Supreme Court act as a trial court without a proper record or final judgment to review. Parties cannot by stipulation confer appellate jurisdiction on the Supreme Court over a case still pending trial. The proper recourse for Lopez was to await the final judgment in the certiorari proceeding before the Court of First Instance.

AI Generated by Armztrong.