G.R. No. L-27134. February 28, 1986.
COMPANIA MARITIMA, plaintiff-appellant, vs. JOSE C. LIMSON, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Compania Maritima filed a complaint against Jose C. Limson for the collection of P44,701.54, representing alleged unpaid freight and passage charges for shipments of livestock from October 1957 to February 1961. Limson denied liability, asserting full payment and disputing his responsibility for numerous shipments where he was not the shipper or had not authorized them. He also filed a counterclaim for rebates, cash payments made, and the cost of foodstuffs sold to the plaintiff, totaling P411,477.45. Given the accounting complexity, the trial court appointed a commissioner, CPA Anselmo T. del Rosario, to examine the accounts.
The commissioner’s report found Limson’s total claims against Maritima amounted to P676,416.05. For Maritima’s claim, based on 1,521 bills of lading, the commissioner concluded Limson was liable only for the 267 bills he or his authorized agent signed, totaling P68,209.76. He recommended disallowing claims based on unsigned bills of lading or those where originals were missing. The trial court largely adopted this report but additionally held Limson liable for charges amounting to P166,867.28 related to bills of lading where originals were missing but other copies existed. The court deducted Limson’s total established liability from his proven claims, resulting in a net balance of P441,339.01 in his favor. Both parties appealed this decision.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the Court of Appeals correctly determined the mutual obligations between the parties, specifically regarding which freight charges were properly chargeable to Limson and the validity of his counterclaims.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision. It held that the commissioner and the lower court erred in strictly requiring original bills of lading to prove Maritima’s claims. Testimony established that Maritima’s practice was to release cargo based on ship manifests or the ship’s copy of bills of lading when originals were unavailable, as they were held by consignees. Therefore, these secondary documents constituted competent evidence to prove shipments and corresponding charges. The Court recalculated the obligations using the total freight charges from the bills of lading supporting the complaint (P698,159.14).
From this, it deducted the rebate due to Limson (P111,291.18), leaving net freight charges of P586,867.96. Against this, the Court credited Limson for his proven counterclaims: cash payments (P235,007.85), a freight adjustment (P1,138.45), and the cost of foodstuffs (P411,982.35), totaling P648,128.65. This computation resulted in a net balance of P61,260.69 in favor of Limson. The Court thus affirmed the judgment on the counterclaim but modified the amount, ordering Compania Maritima to pay Jose C. Limson P61,260.69.