ROGER V. NAVARRO v. HON. JOSE L.

ESCOBIDO, Presiding Judge, RTC Branch 37,

Cagayan de Oro City, and KAREN T. GO, doing business under the name KARGO
ENTERPRISES
G.R. No. 153788 | November 27, 2009

FACTS:

Karen Go filed two complaints before the RTC for replevin and/or sum of money with
damages against Roger Navarro. She prayed that the RTC issue writs of replevin for the seizure
of two (2) motor vehicles in Navarro’s possession due to its failure to pay said vehicles despite
several demands. The RTC then issued writs of replevin for both cases; as a result, the Sheriff
seized the two vehicles and delivered them to Karen Go.

In his Answers, Navarro alleged as a special affirmative defense that the two complaints
stated no causes of action, since Karen Go was not a party to the Lease Agreements with Option
to Purchase – the actionable document on which the complaints were based. He alleged that
even if the lease agreements were in the name of Kargo Enterprises, a sole proprietorship, since
it did not have the requisite juridical capacity to sue, the actual parties to the agreement are
himself and Glenn Go, the husband of Karen.

The RTC dismissed the case acting on the presumption that Glenn Go’s leasing business
is a conjugal property, thus Karen had sufficient interest to file the action. However, the RTC
ordered Karen to file a motion for the inclusion of Glenn Go as co-plaintiff. Upon appeal, the CA
affirmed the RTC’s order.

ISSUE:
Whether Karen Go is a real party-in-interest

RULING:

Yes. A real party-in-interest is the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the
judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit.

While it is true that Glenn Go is the party in the lease agreement representing Kargo
Enterprises as its manager, the registered owner of Kargo Enterprises is Karen Go. Thus, she is
the party who will directly benefit from or be injured by a judgment in this case.