G.R. No. L-2338

FACTS:
The defendants-appellants, Lorenzo del Rosario et al., filed an answer in the lower court containing a counterclaim against the plaintiffs-appellees, Braulio Feliciano et al. This counterclaim was based on a cause of action separate and unrelated to the cause of action in the original complaint. During trial, the defendants offered evidence to support their counterclaim. The trial court, however, sustained the plaintiffs’ objection, ruling that the counterclaim constituted a separate cause of action and was not a proper subject of a counterclaim, thereby barring the presentation of evidence on it.

ISSUE:
Whether the trial court erred in disallowing evidence on the defendants’ counterclaim on the ground that it was a separate and unconnected cause of action.

RULING:
Yes, the trial court committed reversible error. Under Section 95 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a defendant may set forth in their answer any counterclaim, regardless of its nature. The law does not require that the counterclaim arise from or be connected to the cause of action alleged in the complaint. The counterclaim, which alleged the plaintiffs’ unlawful entry upon leased land and construction of a house, sufficiently stated a cause of action. The judgment of the lower court is reversed, and the case is remanded with instructions to receive evidence on the counterclaim. No costs awarded.