Case Digest (G.R. No. 78860)
Facts:
Perla Compania de Seguros, Inc. v. Honorable Court of Appeals and Milagros Cayas, G.R. No. 78860, May 28, 1990, the Supreme Court Third Division, Fernan, C.J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Perla Compania de Seguros, Inc. (PCSI) insured a Mazda passenger bus owned by private respondent Milagros Cayas under policy No. LT0/60CC-04241 issued February 3, 1978. On December 17, 1978, the bus was involved in an accident in Naic, Cavite that injured several passengers.
One injured passenger, Edgardo Perea, sued Cayas in the Court of First Instance (Naic), Civil Case No. NC-794; three other injured passengers (Rosario del Carmen, Ricardo Magsarili and Charlie Antolin) later agreed settlements of P4,000 each with Cayas. At the pre-trial of NC-794 Cayas failed to appear and was declared in default; the Naic court subsequently rendered judgment in favor of Perea (Exh. C).
Cayas first filed a complaint with the Office of the Insurance Commissioner against PCSI seeking payment of P40,000 plus expenses but later withdrew it. On November 11, 1981 Cayas instituted Civil Case No. N-4161 in the Court of First Instance of Cavite against PCSI seeking reimbursement of the sums she paid, damages and attorney’s fees. The case was initially dismissed for failure to prosecute but the dismissal was set aside on motion for reconsideration (order March 31, 1982).
Cayas obtained a default judgment on July 13, 1982 when PCSI was declared in default, ordering PCSI to pay P50,000 as compensation for the injured passengers, P5,000 moral damages and P5,000 attorney’s fees; PCSI successfully moved to set aside the default and the case proceeded to trial. The Cavite trial court thereafter rendered judgment ordering PCSI to pay P50,000 under the policy’s maximum liability and P5,000 attorney’s fees, but denied moral damages; the dispositive portion was quoted by the Supreme Court in the record.
PCSI appealed to the Court of Appeals, which on May 8, 1987 affirmed the trial court’s decision in toto; its motion for reconsideration was denied. ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is the extent of PCSI’s liability to Milagros Cayas limited to the per-person limit of the insurance policy (P12,000.00) rather than the per-accident maximum (P50,000.00)?
- Can Cayas recover from PCSI the payments she made to the three injured passengers (P4,000.00 each) despite not having obtained PCSI’s written consent as required by the policy?
- Was the award of ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)