October 2011 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[G.R. No. 198652 (Formerly UDK-14559) : October 05, 2011]
EDUARDO CEJO V. BENJAMIN C. MACEDA, JR., MANUEL C. MACEDA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 198652 [Formerly UDK-14559] (Eduardo Cejo v. Benjamin C. Maceda, Jr., Manuel C. Maceda, et al.)
RESOLUTION
The Court, after a review of the records, resolves to DENY the petition for its failure to show that a reversible error was committed by the Court of Appeals (CA) in its Decision dated November 25, 2010 and Resolution dated August 9, 2011 in CA-G.R. SP 107117 which granted the petition for certiorari that was filed by respondents and set aside the September 7, 1999 decision in DARAB Case R-0403-0305-98 and the December 6, 2007 and October 8, 2008 Resolutions of Ramon I. Bausas, Provincial Adjudicator, DARAB, Region IV, San Pablo City, Laguna for petitioner's failure to implead indispensable parties in the tenancy case, and ordering the remand of the case to the provincial adjudicator in order to implead the indispensable parties therein and to thereafter hear the said case in the manner prescribed by the DARAB rules.
Well-settled is the rule that joinder of indispensable parties is mandatory. It is a condition sine qua non to the exercise of judicial power. The absence of an indispensable party renders all subsequent actions of the court null and void for want of authority to act, not only as to the absent parties but even as to those present. Without the presence of indispensable parties to the suit, the judgment of the court cannot attain finality. One who is not a party to a case is not bound by any decision of the court; otherwise, he will be deprived of his right to due process. That is why the case is generally remanded to the court of origin for further proceedings.[1] As the September 7, 1999 decision has not attained finality for failure of petitioner to implead indispensable parties in the said case, there is nothing which prevents the CA from setting aside said decision and its execution, and ordering its remand for further proceedings.
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUCITA ABJELINA-SORIANO
Division Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Lagunilla v. Velasco, G.R. No. 169276, June 16, 2009, 589 SCRA 224, 234-235.