G.R. No. L-101292 June 8, 1993
RICARDO ENCARNACION, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and PILIPINO TELEPHONE CORPORATION, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Ricardo Encarnacion was a telephone subscriber of private respondent Pilipino Telephone Corporation (PILTEL). His telephone was installed on June 3, 1982. At midnight of July 10, 1982, his phone service was disconnected by PILTEL to switch operations to a digital electronic system. Petitioner claimed his telephone was not operational from July 10 to September 30, 1982, despite numerous complaints. PILTEL billed him for local service charges for July, August, and September 1982, which he refused to pay, although he admitted paying toll charges (long distance calls) for the same period. Service was restored on October 1, 1982. PILTEL carried over the unpaid local charges (amounting to P164.43) to his subsequent monthly bills. Due to non-payment, PILTEL temporarily disconnected his telephone on May 19, 1983, and made the disconnection permanent on July 14, 1983. Petitioner filed a complaint for Specific Performance and Damages. The Regional Trial Court ruled in favor of petitioner, ordering PILTEL to restore service and awarding moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals reversed the RTC decision, finding that PILTEL had sent disconnection notices and granted grace periods, and that the telephone service had been restored and the account balance condoned, rendering the specific performance action moot.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals committed reversible error in its factual findings and in reversing the RTC decision, particularly regarding the admissibility and evaluation of evidence (the trouble record), the justification for the disconnection, and the award of damages.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition and AFFIRMED the Court of Appeals’ decision. The Court held that the appeal involved an appreciation of facts, not a question of law. It found no reversible error in the appellate court’s reliance on the trouble record, noting that such evidence pertained to its materiality and relevance, and absent grave abuse of discretion, its factual findings would not be disturbed. The Court further observed that petitioner’s claim of total absence of phone service for three months was belied by his own payment of toll charges for long distance calls during the same period, indicating the line was not completely dead but only intermittently disrupted. The Court found no legal justification for the award of moral and exemplary damages, as the disconnection was done after due notices, rebates were granted for interrupted service, the account balance was condoned, and the telephone line was restored, showing no wanton or malevolent actuation by PILTEL.