G.R. No. L-7627, November 30, 1912
CITY OF MANILA, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MANILA ELECTRIC RAILROAD AND LIGHT CO., defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The City of Manila sued the Manila Electric Railroad and Light Company (MERALCO) to collect fees for the inspection and testing of 2,712 electric meters prior to their installation. The city charged P2 per meter under Ordinance No. 68, resulting in a claim of P5,424, but credited MERALCO P1,085.10 for electricity supplied to the city laboratory, leaving a balance of P4,483.90. MERALCO contested the charge, arguing that the city lacked authority to impose such fees, that the P2 fee was excessive, and that the ordinance did not authorize fees for testing meters disconnected for repairs (as opposed to new installations).

ISSUE

1. Whether the City of Manila had the authority to impose fees for inspecting and testing electric meters.
2. Whether the P2 fee per meter was unreasonable or excessive.
3. Whether Ordinance No. 68 authorized fees for testing meters that had been disconnected for repairs.

RULING

1. Yes. Under subsection (ii) of section 17 of the Manila Charter, the city had the authority to regulate and inspect electric meters. This power implicitly includes the authority to impose reasonable fees for such inspections, even if not expressly stated. The fee is not a tax but a charge for services rendered, so it does not violate MERALCO’s franchise exemption from taxes.
2. No. The court found insufficient evidence to declare the P2 fee clearly unreasonable or excessive. Judicial power to invalidate an ordinance as unreasonable must be exercised cautiously, and the trial court’s finding was not disturbed.
3. Yes. Section 23 of Ordinance No. 68, which sets the fee schedule, applies to all inspections and tests under the ordinance, not only those for new installations under Section 22. The language “inspection and test herein provided” refers to all tests authorized by the ordinance, including those under Section 5 for meters disconnected for repairs.

The judgment of the lower court was affirmed.