GR L 45454; (April, 1939) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-45454; April 12, 1939
EULALIO GARCIA, Judge of First Instance of Camarines Sur, and MERCEDES CALDERA DE SABINO, petitioners, vs. SINFOROSA C. DAVID, MARCIANA C. VILLAMORA, ENCARNACION C. ENOJADO, CRISANTO CASTRO and ALFREDO CASTRO, respondents.
FACTS
Mercedes Caldera de Sabino filed a personal action (Civil Case No. 6277) against Candida Espinosa to recover the value of a promissory note signed by Isaac Villamora on behalf of Espinosa. The respondents, who are the children and heirs of Mariano Castro (the deceased husband of Espinosa), moved to intervene in the case, claiming an interest because Espinosa was married to Castro at the time the note was executed. The trial court denied the motion for intervention, finding the respondents neither proper nor necessary parties. The Court of Appeals later granted a writ of mandamus to compel the trial judge to allow the intervention. Petitioners now seek certiorari to review the Court of Appeals’ decision.
ISSUE
Whether the respondents, as heirs of the deceased husband of the defendant, have a legal interest in the subject matter of the litigation entitling them to intervene under Section 121 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and upheld the trial court’s denial of intervention. Under Section 121 of the Code of Civil Procedure, intervention requires a legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either party, or an interest against both. The interest must be actual, material, direct, and immediate, not merely contingent or expectant. Here, the respondents’ interest as heirs is contingent and expectant, as it depends on the liquidation of the conjugal partnership after the dissolution of the marriage and is subject to various contingencies. The action is a personal one against the defendant widow alone; any judgment would affect only her estate, not the direct rights or property of the heirs. Therefore, the respondents lack the requisite legal interest to intervene. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion.
AI Generated by Armztrong.