G.R. No. L-42918 September 30, 1984
NESTOR M. PATRIARCA, petitioner, vs. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and CENTRAL AZUCARERA DE LA CARLOTA, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Nestor Patriarca worked as a locomotive mechanic and later as a diesel locomotive supervisor for respondent Central Azucarera de La Carlota. His duties involved strenuous effort and exposure to harsh elements. On October 26, 1974, he suffered severe stomach pain, was diagnosed with a stomach tumor, and underwent surgery. He stopped working on November 9, 1974, and resumed on February 10, 1975, in a less taxing position. He was later discharged due to physical disability. He filed a claim for compensation benefits.
The Workmen’s Compensation Unit awarded Patriarca P1,130.08 for temporary total disability and an additional amount for a 60% non-schedule disability (NSD) for permanent partial disability, subject to a P6,000 statutory maximum. On appeal, the Workmen’s Compensation Commission modified the award, granting only P1,006.72 for the temporary disability period and disallowing the 60% NSD benefit entirely. The Commission held that a gastrectomy did not result in a permanent partial disability compensable under Section 18 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

ISSUE

Whether the Workmen’s Compensation Commission erred in disallowing the award for permanent partial disability benefits under Section 18 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the Commission’s decision and reinstated the award from the Workmen’s Compensation Unit. The legal logic centers on the evaluation of disability and the hierarchy of medical opinions. The Commission erred in disregarding the 60% NSD rating provided by Dr. Antonio Habana, the Compensation Rating Medical Officer, who based his evaluation on medical records and a physical examination, finding occasional abdominal pain and impaired appetite that moderately interfered with occupation. This fell under the Schedule for “chronic diseases… of the abdominal organs.”
The Court emphasized that between the assessment of Dr. Habana, who examined the claimant for compensation purposes, and the attending physician, Dr. Patricio Tan, who diagnosed and operated on Patriarca, greater weight should be accorded to the attending physician’s findings and records, which supported the existence of a residual disability. The Commission’s conclusion that a gastrectomy alone does not cause permanent disability was contradicted by this medical evidence showing ongoing symptoms. Therefore, the permanent partial disability award was proper. However, the total compensation from both temporary and permanent disability awards was correctly limited by law to the maximum sum of P6,000.