Land Bank v Cacayuran

*the Municipality of Agoo, La Union, entered into a loan with Land Bank to finance the redevelopment plan of
its plaza -- through its Mayor

*Cacayuran was one of the residents who oppposed to the redevelopment of the Plaza, as well as the funding
through bank loan.

* Invoking as a taxpayer, he filed a complaint asking for the redevelopment be enjoined.

* During the pendency of the proceedings, the construction was completed.

-RTC: Declared the Subject Loans null and void as it was passed in a highly irregular manner and thus ultra vires

-CA: Affirmed ruling of RTC

-SC: Set Aside CA ruling and ordered the case to be remanded, ordering Cacayuran to implead all indispensable
parties

*The Court finds the Municipality as an indispensable party, without which all subsequent actions of the Court
shall be considered null and void, not only as to the absent parties but even as to those present.

-- It must be noted that the action was only filed against the Mayor, V-Mayor, 10 members of the
Sangguniang Bayan, without including the Municipality.

*Nevertheless, it must be stressed that the failure to implead any indispensable party to a suit does not
necessarily result in the outright dismissal of the complaint. -- The proper remedy is to implead them and not
to dismiss the case

Ang v Pacunio

*Pacunio et al are the grandchildren and the successors-in-interest of the Udiaan, who died on 1972.

*However, they discovered that someone is falsely representing as Udiaan and sold a property belonging to
the latter on 1993.

-RTC: Dismissed the case. There is dearth of evidence proving the successional rights of Pacunio et al to the
estate of Udiaan. Hence, they are not the real parties in interest

-CA: Affirmed RTC’s decision that Pacunio are not the real parties-in-interest as they are merely the
grandchildren of Udiaan, that t hey have no successional rights to the latter’s estate.

-SC: Affirmed CA’s decision declaring Pacunio as not the real parties-in-interest

*Interest within the meaning of the Rules of Court means material interest or an interest in issue to be
affected by the decree or judgment of the case, as distinguished from mere curiosity about the question
involved.

*In the instant case, Pacunio claims to be the successors-in-interest of the subject land because they are
Udiaan’s grandchildren. However, to be deemed to have material interest over the matter, the right of
representation under Article 970, in relation to 982, is available to them. -- representatives will be called to
succession by the law and not by the person represented; and the representative does not succeed the person
represented but the one whom the person represented would have succeeded.

*For such right to be available, Pacunio must first show that their mother, who predeceased Udiaan is
incapacitated to inherit or was disinherited, if Udiaan died intestate.

*However, as correctly pointed out, nothing in the records would show that the right of representation is
available to respondents.