Case Digest (G.R. No. 112360)
Facts:
Rizal Surety & Insurance Company v. Court of Appeals and Transworld Knitting Mills, Inc., G.R. No. 112360, July 18, 2000, Supreme Court Third Division, Purisima, J., writing for the Court.On March 13, 1980, Rizal Surety & Insurance Company (petitioner) issued Fire Insurance Policy No. 45727 in favor of Transworld Knitting Mills, Inc. (private respondent), initially for P1,000,000 and later increased to P1,500,000, covering the period August 14, 1980 to March 13, 1981. The policy described coverage of stocks, finished/unfinished products, raw materials and supplies “contained and/or stored during the currency of this Policy in the premises occupied by them forming part of the buildings situate…within own Compound at Magdalo Street, Barrio Ugong, Pasig,” and described a four-span lofty one-storey building with mezzanine portions. The same properties were also insured with New India Assurance Company, Ltd.
On January 12, 1981 a fire razed the middle portion of the four-span building, partially gutting its left and right sections, and destroyed a two-storey building behind the four-span building where fun-and-amusement machines and spare parts were stored. Transworld filed insurance claims with Rizal and New India but they were denied. On May 26, 1982 Transworld sued both insurers in Civil Case No. 46106 (Branch 161, then Court of First Instance of Rizal) for collection and damages.
The trial court rendered judgment on January 4, 1990: it dismissed the case as to New India and ordered Rizal to pay Transworld P826,500 (plus costs). Both parties appealed to the Court of Appeals. The CA (Special Tenth Division; Ponente: Cezar D. Francisco) on July 15, 1993 modified the trial court’s decision, assessing P1,818,604.19 against New India and P470,328.67 against Rizal, totaling P2,790,376.00, and ordering no costs. On October 22, 1993 the CA amended only the interest assessment on those amounts after a motion for reconsideration.
New India appealed to the Supreme Court (G.R. No. L-111118) disputing Transworld’s insurable interest in the machines stored in the two-storey building; that appeal was denied finality by this Court on February 2, 1994. Petitioner Rizal then filed this Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari seeking annul...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the prior adjudication in G.R. No. L-111118 as to Transworld’s insurable interest operate as conclusive and preclusive against petitioner Rizal here?
- Were the fun-and-amusement machines and spare parts stored in the two-storey building covered by Rizal’s fire insurance policy (i.e., was the two-storey building part of the insured premises)?
- Is Transworld liable for moral and punitive damages, attorney’s fees and litigation exp...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)