G.R. No. L-6533; June 29, 1954
PANGASINAN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, INC., petitioner, vs. SIMPLICIO DE LA CRUZ, respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Simplicio de la Cruz, an existing operator of TPU auto-truck service, applied to the Public Service Commission for authority to expand his operations to three new lines (Urdaneta-Dagupan via Manaoag, Urdaneta-San Fernando, and Urdaneta-San Jose) using fourteen units. The Pangasinan Transportation Company (PANTRANCO) and two other operators opposed the application. The Commission granted the application but reduced the authorized units to a total of five auto-trucks for the three lines. Only PANTRANCO appealed, raising two issues: the applicant’s financial capability and the need for additional service.

ISSUE

1. Whether the applicant is financially capable of undertaking the expanded service.
2. Whether there is a public need for the additional service applied for.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Public Service Commission.
1. On financial capability, the Court found no error in the Commission’s holding. Although applicant applied for fourteen units, only five were authorized. Applicant’s unrebutted testimony showed an annual income of P5,000, P10,000 invested in convertible gasoline, and that he had already purchased three Chevrolet trucks and had an agreement to acquire ten more from his uncle. This supported a finding of financial capability to operate and maintain the proposed five-unit service.
2. On public need, the Court held that there was evidence reasonably supporting the Commission’s finding of a need for additional services to adequately serve the traveling public. The Commission considered conflicting testimony, its own records on existing authorized services, and evidence of heavy traffic and inadequate current service. The Supreme Court reiterated the doctrine that it will not interfere with the Commission’s factual conclusions based on conflicting evidence unless there is a clear absence of supporting evidence.