This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-06-27 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| That with grave abuse of discretion, the lower court erred in concluding that the P100,000.00 loan of Benjamin Lasola from the Bank with a collateral allegedly worth of P800,000.00 excites suspicion, hence, both defendants-appellants were guilty of Bad faith.[7] As a preliminary matter, the Court notes a formal defect in the petition in that spouses Lasola and the Rural Bank were not impleaded as parties to the present petition; rather, they were merely mentioned in the title as defendants-appellants, their designation in the appeal before the CA. Under Section 4(a), Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, it is required that the petition shall state the full names of the appealing party as the petitioner and the adverse party as the respondent, without impleading the lower courts or judges thereof either as petitioners or respondents. The Lasolas and the Rural Bank are undoubtedly adverse parties, specially since petitioners have a cross-claim against them;[8] and one of the issues, including their arguments, raised in their petition involves said parties.[9] The result of such failure, fundamentally, will be that said parties cannot be compelled to abide by and comply with the Court's Decision, as it will not be binding on them. No man shall be affected by any proceeding to which he is a stranger, and strangers to a case are not bound by any judgment rendered by the court.[10] | |||||