35 Relucio v.
Lopez the same for his sole gain and benefit to the total exclusion of
GR. NO. 138497 |January 16, 2002 | Pardo, J the private respondent and their four children — and after
Sarigumba III, Norberto doing so, maintained an illicit relationship and cohabited with
Joinder of Parties: Necessary and Indispensable Parties
Relucio.
DOCTRINE:
1. A real party in interest is one who stands “to be Alberto and Relucio have amassed a fortune during their
benefited or injured by the judgment of the suit.” cohabitation consisting mainly of stockholdings in Lopez-
owned or controlled corporations, residential, agricultural,
commercial lots, houses, apartments and buildings, cars and
2. An indispensable party is one without whom there
other motor vehicles, bank accounts and jewelry. It was also
can be no final determination of an action.
averred that Alberto avoided his obligations as father and
husband.
3. A necessary party as one who is not indispensable
but who ought to be joined as party if complete
RTC
relief is to be accorded those already parties, or for
● A Motion to Dismiss was filed by Relucio, on the
a complete determination or settlement of the claim
ground that there is no cause of action against
subject of the action.
her RTC denied the Motion on the ground that
she is impleaded as a necessary or
FACTS: indispensable party because some of the
Angelina Lopez filed a petition for “Appointment as sole subject properties are registered under her
administrator of Conjugal Partnership of Properties, name and Alberto, or solely in her name. MR
Forfeiture, etc.” against Alberto Lopez and Imelda Relucio in was likewise denied.
RTC Makati.
CA
Angelina alleged that Alberto, who is legally married to her, ● Denied the petition as well. Hence the appeal.
abandoned her and their 4 legitimate children and that he
arrogated unto himself the full and exclusive control and ISSUE:
administration of the conjugal properties, spending and using
1. W/N Angelina’s petition for appointment as sole would not be affected by any judgment in Special
administratrix of the conjugal property against Proceedings M-3630.
Alberto established a cause of action against
Relucio – NO If petitioner is not a real party-in-interest, she cannot be an
2. W/N Relucio’s inclusion as party indispensable party. An indispensable party is one without
defendant is essential in the whom there can be no final determination of an action.
proceeding – NO Petitioner’s participation in Special Proceedings M-3630 is
not indispensable. Certainly, the trial court can issue a
RULING: judgment ordering Alberto J. Lopez to make an accounting of
his conjugal partnership with respondent, and give support to
Issue #1:
respondent and their children, and dissolve Alberto J. Lopez’
Angelina’s main cause of action is for judicial
conjugal partnership with respondent, and forfeit Alberto J.
appointment of respondent as administratrix of the
Lopez’ share in property co-owned by him and petitioner.
conjugal partnership or absolute community property
Such judgment would be perfectly valid and enforceable
arising from her marriage to Alberto J. Lopez. Relucio
against Alberto J. Lopez.
is a complete stranger to this cause of action.
Nor can petitioner be a necessary party in Special
The administration of the property of the marriage is
Proceedings M-3630. A necessary party as one who is not
entirely between them, to the exclusion of all other persons.
indispensable but who ought to be joined as party if complete
Respondent alleges that Alberto is her husband. Therefore,
relief is to be accorded those already parties, or for a
her cause of action is against Alberto J. Lopez. There is no
complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of
right-duty relation between petitioner and respondent that
the action. In the context of her petition in the lower court,
can possibly support a cause of action. In fact, none of the
respondent would be accorded complete relief if Alberto J.
three elements of a cause of action exists.
Lopez were ordered to account for his alleged conjugal
partnership property with respondent, give support to
Issue #2:
respondent and her children, turn over his share in the co-
A real party in interest is one who stands “to be benefited or
injured by the judgment of the suit.” In this case, petitioner
ownership with petitioner and dissolve his conjugal
partnership or absolute community property with respondent.
DISPOSITION:
WHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the petition and REVERSES
the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court DISMISSES
Special Proceedings M-3630 of the Regional Trial Court,
Makati, Branch 141 as against petitioner. No costs. SO
ORDERED.
