GR 46085; (November, 1938) (2) (Digest)
G.R. No. 46085 & 46086. November 4, 1938.
BULACAN BUS COMPANY, INC., petitioner-appellant, vs. FERNANDO ENRIQUEZ, respondent-appellee. ( G.R. No. 46085 )
BULACAN BUS COMPANY, INC., petitioner-appellant, vs. MARCELO DIAZ, respondent-appellee. (G.R. No. 46086)
FACTS
The Bulacan Bus Company, Inc. (appellant) appealed the joint decision of the Public Service Commission lifting the route restrictions on the certificates of public convenience of respondents Fernando Enriquez and Marcelo Diaz. Enriquez and Diaz were authorized to operate bus lines but were restricted from picking up or dropping off passengers along specific segments of their routes (e.g., within 55 kilometers from Calumpit to Manila for Enriquez, and at certain points for Diaz). They applied for the lifting of these restrictions. The Public Service Commissioner granted their applications, finding that the volume of traffic had greatly increased since the restrictions were imposed in 1929, that maintaining them would be discriminatory and against public interest, and that lifting them would not prejudice existing operators like Bulacan Bus Company, which itself had recently been granted an increase in its fleet. Bulacan Bus Company opposed, arguing the existing service was adequate and that lifting the restrictions would cause prejudice.
ISSUE
Whether the Public Service Commission erred in lifting the route restrictions imposed on the certificates of public convenience of respondents Enriquez and Diaz.
RULING
No, the Public Service Commission did not err. The Supreme Court affirmed the Commission’s decision in toto. The Court held that the Commission’s findings were reasonably supported by the evidence, which showed a great and increasing volume of traffic on the routes, that public convenience now demanded the additional service, and that lifting the restrictions would better serve the public without prejudicing the appellant. The Court reiterated the established rule that decisions of the Public Service Commission, when reasonably supported by evidence, must be sustained. The restrictions, imposed under different circumstances in 1929, were no longer appropriate given the changed public necessity. Therefore, the lifting of the restrictions was in accordance with law and promoted public convenience over private interest. Costs were awarded against the appellant.
AI Generated by Armztrong.