MERCADER VS.

DBP F:In its Pre-Trial Order, the RTC limited the issues to be resolved in the case to threeissues. Thereafter, the plaintiff, P, filed a supplemental pleading that dealt with a new issue involving a lease-purchase option. D opposed the supplemental pleading Issue:Whether the issue involving the lease -purchase option was properly raised in the pleadings Held:Yes. Said issue was raised in the supplemental pleading subsequently filed by P. As asupplemental pleading, it served to aver supervening facts which were then not ripe for judicialrelief when the original pleading was filed. As such, it was meant to supply deficiencies in aid of the original pleading, and not to dispense with the latt MERCADER VS. DBPG.R. NO. 130699 (2000) Facts: During the trial, the counsel of D participated in the direct and cross -examination of witnesses whose testimonies included an issue not among those appearing in the Pre -TrialOrder. The RTC ruled on the said issue. D questions the RTCs inclusion of the said issue in itsruling. Issue: Whether the said issue should be decided by the RTC Held: Yes. D is estopped from questioning the RTCs inclusion of said issue by its participationin the direct and cross-examination of witnesses whose testimonies included said topic. BERNARDO MERCADER VS. DBPG.R. NO. 130699 (2000) Facts: During the trial, P offered evidence on an issue not alleged in the pleadings. D objectedto the introduction of such evidence. Issue: Whether the RTC may admit the evidence Held: Yes. When evidence is offered on a matter not alleged in the pleadings, the court mayadmit it even against the objection of the adverse party, where the latter fails to satisfy the courtthat the admission of the evidence would prejudice him in maintaining his defense upon themerits, and the court may grant him a continuance to enable him to meet the new situationcreated by the evidence. Of course, the court, before allowing the evidence, as a matter of formality, should allow an amendment of the pleading.