RCBC v. Metrocon Digest

RCBC v. Metrocon

Facts:

1. The Respondent filed an interpleader suit against the petitioner and  LEYCON to compel them to interplead and litigate their several claims between themselves and to determine which will receive the rental payments for the subject property. Respondent is the lessee of LEYCON, who previously contracted a loan from the petitioner. The subject leased property was mortgaged as security for the loan which was later on foreclosed by the petitioner.

2. LEYCON filed an unlawful detainer case against the respondent, and the later moves to dismiss this case due to an amicable settlement forged later on. LEYCON likewise filed the same but the lower court denied the motions hence the appeal to the Court of Appeals. The appellate court granted the petition and ordered the dismissal of the ejectment case.

Issue: Whether or not the action for interpleader is proper

RULING:

No. The reason for the interpleader case ceased when the MeTC ordered respondent to pay LEYCON the rents due. Even if the petitioner could not be bound in that decision, respondent was a party to that case. Moreover, the said decision already became final and executory and thus became judicial fiat on the respondent. The desire of the respondent to dismiss the interpleader case is not due to its lac of interest but more to the fact that there is no more need to pursue the cause of action, as the conflict has already been resolved.