37. Leyte-Samar-Sales and K. Tomassi vs. S. Cea and O. Castrilla, 93 Phil. 100

Leyte-Samar-Sales and K. Tomassi vs. Cea and O. Castrilla Facts: 

 Thisis a suit suit for damages by the Leyte-Samar Sales Co. (hereinafter (hereinafter called LSSCO! LSSCO! and "aymond Tomassi against the Far astern Lumber # Commercial Co. (unregistered commercial $artnershi$ hereinafter called FLCO!% &rnold 'all% Fred ro)n and *ean "o+as% ,udgment against defendants ,ointly and severally for the amount of /%012./3 $lus costs. 

 The decision decision having become 4nal% the sheri5 sheri5 sold at auction auction on *une 2% /20/ to "obert 6orfe and e$ito &sturias 7all the rights% interests% titles and $artici$ation7 of the defendants in certain buildings and $ro$erties described in the certi4cate 

on *une 3% /20/ Olegario Lastrilla 4led in the case a motion% )herein he claimed to be the o)ner by $urchase on Se$tember 82% /232% of all the 7shares and interests7 of defendant Fred ro)n 

 *une /% /20/% granted Lastrilla9s Lastrilla9s motion. On &ugust /3% /20/% /20/% modi4ed its order of delivery and merely declared that Lastrilla )as entitled to / $er cent of the $ro$erties sold. 

the $etitioners see; relief by certiorari% their $osition being the such orders )ere null and void for lac; of ,urisdiction. ,urisdiction. ? the court acted )ith e+cess of its  ,urisdiction@  ,urisdiction@

"ule: Aes. The $arties )ere not noti4ed% and obviously too; no $art in the $roceedings on the motion. & valid ,udgment cannot be rendered )here there is a )ant of necessary $arties% and a court cannot $ro$erly ad,udicate matters involved in a suit )hen necessary and indis$ensable $arties to the $roceedings are not before it. (32 C.*.S.% B.!. &ll the defendants )ould have reasonable motives to ob,ect to the delivery of / $er cent of the $roceeds to Lustrial% because it is so much money deducted% and for )hich the $lainti5s might as another levy on their other holdings or resources.

"e$ublic of the hili$$ines S"D CO"T Danila ? &?C E.". ?o. L-02B

Day 8% /20

 T' LAT-S&D&" S&LS CO.% and "&AD?6O TOD&SS<% $etitioners% vs. SL
a$$eal bond of B after the record on a$$eal bond of B after the record on a$$eal had been re,ected% the matter of mandamus may be summarily be dro$$ed )ithout further comment. From the $leadings it a$$ears that%
 The record is not very clear% but there are indications% and )e shall assume for the moment% that Fred ro)n (li;e &rnold 'all and *ean "o+as! )as a $artner of the FLCO% )as defendant in Civil Case ?o. /2 as such $artner% and that the $ro$erties sold at auction actually belonged to the FLCO $artnershi$ and the $artners. =e shall also assume that the sale made to Lastrilla on Se$tember 82% /232% of all the shares of Fred ro)n in the FLCO )as valid. ("emember that ,udgment in this case )as entered in the court of 4rst instance a year before.!  The result then% is that on *une 2% /20/ )hen the sale )as e5ected of the $ro$erties of FLCO to "oberto 6orfe and e$ito &sturias% Lastilla )as already a $artner of FLCO. ?o)% does Lastrilla have any $ro$er claim to the $roceeds of the sale@
amounted to )ant of ,urisdiction% considering s$ecially that 6orfe and &ustrias% and the defendants themselves% had undoubtedly the right to be heardNbut they )ere not noti4ed.3 =hy )as it necessary to hear them on the merits of Lastrilla9s motion@ ecause 6orfe and &ustrillas might be un)illing to recogniJed the validity of Lastrilla9s $urchase% or% if valid% they may )ant him not to forsa;e the $artnershi$ that might have some obligations in connection )ith the $artnershi$ $ro$erties. &nd )hat is more im$ortant% if the motion is granted% )hen the time for redem$tioner seventeen $er cent (/1M! less than amount they had $aid for the same $ro$erties.  The defendants &rnold 'all and *ean "o+as% eyeing Lastrilla9s 4nancial assets% might also o$$ose the substitution by Lastrilla of Fred ro)n% the ,udgment against them being ,oint and several. They might entertain misgivings about ro)n9s sli$$ing out of their common $redicament through the dis$osal of his shares. Lastly% all the defendants )ould have reasonable motives to ob,ect to the delivery of  / $er cent of the $roceeds to Lustrial% because it is so much money deducted% and for )hich the $lainti5s might as another levy on their other holdings or resources. Su$$osing of course% there )as no fraudulent collusion among them. ?o)% these varied interest of necessity ma;e 6orfe% &sturias and the defendants indis$ensable $arties to the motion of Lastrilla N granting it )as ste$ allo)able under our regulations on e+ecution. Aet these $arties )ere not noti4ed% and obviously too; no $art in the $roceedings on the motion. & valid ,udgment cannot be rendered )here there is a )ant of necessary $arties% and a court cannot $ro$erly ad,udicate matters involved in a suit )hen necessary and indis$ensable $arties to the $roceedings are not before it. (32 C.*.S.% B.!
. . . &nd in those instances )herein the lo)er court has acted )ithout ,urisdiction over the sub,ect-matter% or )here the order or ,udgment com$lained of is a $atent nullity% courts have gone even as far as to disregard com$letely the Iuestions of $etitioner9s fault% the reason being% undoubtedly% that acts $erformed )ith absolute )ant of ,urisdiction over the sub,ect-matter are void ab initio and cannot be validated by consent% e+$ress or im$lied% of the $arties. Thus% the Su$reme Court granted a $etition for certiorari and set aside an order reo$ening a cadastral case 4ve years after the ,udgment rendered therein had become 4nal.
Footnotes / "eIuiring sheri5 to turn over / $er cent of the $roceeds to Lastillas. 8 This is a feature to be discussed bet)een the three them at the $ro$er time N and this statement does not attem$t to settle their res$ective rights.

 Cf. Danila 'erald ublishing Co. vs. *udge "amos% 11 hil.% 23% Doran% Comments% /208 ed. Gol. 8% $. 3B. 3 True% Lastrilla )as attorney for defendants% but he )as careful in all his motions on the matter to sign 7in his o)n re$resentation7 or 7for himself and in his behalf.7