PHILIPPINE RABBIT BUS LINE, INC., PETITIONER AND APPELLEE, VS. JESUS D. VILLAPANA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS AND APPELLANTS.

On May 20, 1959, the Chief of the Motor Vehicles Office issued Circular No.
28 directing that the negotiable certificates of indebtedness that may be
accepted for payment of registration fees are those belonging to the backpay
holders only and not those in the hands of assignees. The Philippine
Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc., a public utility corporation, paid with the negotiable
certificates of indebtedness assigned to it its second installment registration
fees for the year 1959 in the sum of P78,638.17 in the Baguio City agency of the
Motor Vehicles Office.

On November 4, 1959, the Chief of the Motor Vehicles Office issued Memorandum
No. 36 calling attention to the fact that in spite of the aforesaid Circular No.
28 some negotiable certificates of indebtednesiS that do not belong to backpay
holders had been used in the payment of registration fees and so it required the
owners who paid said certificates to replace them with cash or checks plus 50%
penalty, and to insure the collection of the required registration fees,
beginning with the 1960 registration, the number plates of those owners involved
in said payments should be withheld until the settlement of their previous
obligations, with the understanding however that the 1960 registration fees
should be collected in order that the owners may not become liable to pay the
penalty for 1960.

The Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. paid to the Provincial Treasurer of
Tarlac, Tarlac on February 25, 1960 the sum of P92,955.00 in cash corresponding
to the first installment of registration fees for 1960 for 257 TPU units
belonging to it, as well at P2,584.00 in cash corresponding to the first
installment of registration fees for 1960 for 6 TH units also belonging to it.
But notwithstanding these payments, the Motor Vehicles Registrar of Tarlac,
Tarlac refused to release tne registration certificates ana number plates of
said vehicles for the year 1960 in view of the aforementioned Memorandum No. 36
for the reason that the Philippine Rabbit Bus Line, Inc. had not replaced with
cash the negotiable certificates of indebtedness it paid for the year 1959.

On February 29, 1960, the Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. filed with the
Court of First Instance of Tarlac the present petition seeking to compel the
Motor Vehicles Registrar of Tarlac as well as the Chief of the Motor Vehicle
Office to deliver immediately the 1960 registration certificates and number
plates of the 263 units of the Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. It also prayed
that pending the determination of the case on the merits, a writ of preliminary
mandatory injunction be issued against respondents to enable petitioner to
operate its buses on or after March 1, 1960 until further orders from the court.
And having filled the required bond, the writ of preliminary injunction prayed
for was issued against respondents.

On March 18, 1960, respondents filed their answer, and after trial on the
merits, the court a quo rendered decision granting the petition and
ordering respondents to deliver immediately to petitioner the 1960 registration
certificates and number plates corresponding to petitioner’s 257 TPU units and 6
TH units for which the 1960 registration fees had already been paid. The court
declared permanent the writ of preliminary injunction heretofore issued.

Respondents have duly appealed from the decision. Their brief was filed with
this Court on February 21, 1961, whereas the brief of appellee was filed on
April 22, 1961. The case was set for hearing on September 22, 1961 on which date
the case was submitted for decision.

It appearing that the present petition is one for mandamus the purpose of
which is to compel respondents to deliver immediately the 1960 registration
certificates and number plates of the 263 units of the Philippine Rabbit Bus
Lines, Inc. in view of the fact that the registration fees for the operation of
said units for said year 1960 had been duly paid, and it appearing that upon the
filing of said petition the court a quo issued mandatory preliminary
injunction upon the posting of the requisite bond to enable petitioner to
operate its buses and trucks on or from March 1, 1960 until further orders from
the court, and since said date up to the present said buses and trucks have been
operated unhampered because the registration fees thereon had been consistently
paid, it is the sense of this Court that the purpose of the present petition has
been substantially accomplished with the issuance of the preliminary mandatory
injunction with the result that the . same has now become moot and academic.

For these reasons, the Court resolved to dismiss the present case and appeal,
without prejudice on the part of respondents to recover in an appropriate motion
the registration fees which they claim had not been validly paid for the year
1959.

Wherefore, the present appeal is hereby dismissed with the above reservation,
without pronouncement as to costs. The instant petition is also hereby
dismissed, and the writ issued by the court a quo dissolved.

Bengzon, C. J., Padilla, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera,
Paredes, Dizon, Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.