Case Digest (G.R. No. 127261)
Facts:
Visayan Surety & Insurance Corporation v. The Honorable Court of Appeals, Spouses Jun Bartolome and Susan Bartolome and Dominador V. Ibajan, G.R. No. 127261, September 07, 2001, First Division, Pardo, J., writing for the Court.On February 2, 1993, plaintiffs-spouses Danilo Ibajan and Mila Ambe Ibajan filed a complaint for replevin against spouses Jun and Susan Bartolome in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Binan, Laguna, claiming ownership of an Isuzu jeepney allegedly taken on December 8, 1992. On February 8, 1993 the plaintiffs filed a replevin bond with petitioner Visayan Surety & Insurance Corporation and, that same day, the RTC issued a writ of replevin directing the sheriff to take custody of the vehicle.
The sheriff seized the jeepney on February 22, 1993 and delivered it to the plaintiffs. The Bartolomes, however, on February 15, 1993 had moved to quash the writ and to order return of the vehicle. On May 3, 1993 Dominador V. Ibajan filed a motion to intervene in the replevin action, asserting a superior ownership and possession interest; the RTC granted intervention on June 1, 1993.
On August 8, 1993 the RTC granted the Bartolomes’ motion to quash the writ of replevin and ordered Mila Ibajan to return the jeepney to intervenor Dominador Ibajan, the registered owner. The court later ordered issuance of a writ directing the sheriff to deliver the vehicle to Dominador; the writ issued September 1, 1993 was returned unsatisfied. On March 7, 1994 Dominador moved for judgment against the plaintiffs’ replevin bond.
On June 6, 1994 the RTC rendered judgment in favor of intervenor Dominador Ibajan and against Mila Ibajan and Visayan Surety, jointly and severally, for the value of the jeepney (P150,000.00) and other proven damages. Motions for reconsideration by Mila Ibajan and Visayan Surety were denied on August 16, 1994.
Visayan Surety appealed to the Court of Appeals (docketed CA-G.R. CV No. 49094). On August 30, 1996 the Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC judgment; a motion for reconsideration was denied on December ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Whether the intervenor, by intervening, may be considered a party to the plaintiffs’ replevin bond and thus a beneficiary of that contract.
- Whether Visayan Surety & Insurance Corporation is liable to intervenor Dominador V. Ibajan under the plainti...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)