G.R. No. L-42974, May 7, 1935
PASAY TRANSPORTATION CO., INC. vs. FRANCISCO CRUZ (consolidated with G.R. Nos. L-42975 and L-42976)
FACTS
Petitioner Pasay Transportation Co., Inc. filed complaints before the Public Service Commission against respondents (operators of PU automobiles) for allegedly picking up and dropping off passengers in places forbidden by their certificates of public convenience. The respondents moved to dismiss the complaints on the ground that the same acts were the subject of a contempt proceeding already filed and pending decision in the Court of First Instance of Rizal (Civil Case No. 5680), where the petitioner sought to punish the respondents for violating an injunction order. The Public Service Commission granted the motion and dismissed the cases, reasoning that it would be unjust to prosecute the respondents twice for the same infractions and to avoid potential conflict with the court’s decision.
ISSUE
Did the Public Service Commission err in dismissing the complaints on the ground of avoiding double prosecution for the same infractions?
RULING
No, the Public Service Commission did not err. While both the Court of First Instance (in the contempt case) and the Public Service Commission (in the revocation/suspension proceeding) have concurrent jurisdiction over the subject matter and parties based on the same acts, the filing of the complaint before the Commission was premature. The petitioner should have awaited the decision of the Court of First Instance in the contempt case to avoid any possibility of conflicting decisions. The Supreme Court, under the circumstances, sustained the Commission’s dismissal of the cases but without prejudice to refiling. The petition for review was denied.
AI Generated by Armztrong.