SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 243417. February 11, 2019.]
NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, petitioner,vs. EDUARDO F. HERNANDEZ, ET AL., respondents, MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY AND NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, intervenors.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 11 February 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 243417 (National Power Corporation v. Eduardo F. Hernandez, et al. [respondents], Manila Electric Company and National Grid Corporation of the Philippines [intervenors])
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the September 25, 2018 Decision 2 and the November 29, 2018 Resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 150903 for failure of petitioner National Power Corporation to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in holding that the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 147 (RTC) did not commit grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioner National Power Corporation's (NAPOCOR) Motion for the Substitution of Parties and of Counsel (Motion for Substitution). 4
As correctly ruled by the CA, Section 19, 5 Rule 3 of the Revised Rules of Court allows the trial court ample discretion to allow or disallow the substitution or joinder of the transferee, in this case, the National Transmission Corporation (TRANSCO). Discretion is permitted because, in general, the transferee's interest is deemed by law as adequately represented and protected by the participation of his transferors in the case. There may be no need for the transferee pendente lite to be substituted or joined because, in legal contemplation, he is not really denied protection as his interest is one and the same as his transferors, who are already parties to the case. 6 Accordingly, the RTC's denial of NAPOCOR's motion for substitution of TRANSCO as defendant in this case was well within its discretion. In any case, TRANSCO had already been joined as party defendant in the RTC's March 16, 2017 Omnibus Order. 7
SO ORDERED." (PERALTA, J., designated Additional Member viceHERNANDO, J., per Special Order No. 2630-L dated February 11, 2019.)
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
By:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 35-55.
2.Id. at 61-72. Penned by Associate Justice Gabriel T. Robeniol with Associate Justices Ricardo R. Rosario and Ramon Paul L. Hernando (now a member of this Court), concurring.
3.Id. at 73-75. Penned by Associate Justice Gabriel T. Robeniol with Associate Justices Ricardo R. Rosario and Edwin D. Sorongon, concurring.
4. Dated December 16, 2016. Id. at 163-170.
5. Section 19. Transfer of interest. — In case of any transfer of interest, the action may be continued by or against the original party, unless the court upon motion directs the person to whom the interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with the original party.
6. See Heirs of Medrano v. De Vera, 641 Phil. 228, 242 (2010).
7.Rollo, pp. 134-136. Signed by Presiding Judge Ronald B. Moreno.