G.R. No. L-5906. May 26, 1954
ANGAT-MANILA TRANSPORTATION CO., INC., PETITIONER VS. VICTORIA VDA. DE TENGCO, RESPONDENT.
PARAS, C.J.:
Service Commission an application for a certificate of public
convenience to operate six passenger and freight buses between San
Miguel, Bulacan, and Manila. The application was opposed by Pampanga
Bus Co., Nicolas Javier, Bachrach Motor Co., Gaudencio Nicolas, Enrique
de Leon, Angat-Manila Transportation Co., Inc. (petitioner herein), and
Valentin Fernando, on the ground that their bus service passing through
or near San Miguel is adequate to cope with the public need. Only two
of these operators, however, actually presented evidence in support of
their oppositions.
The respondent presented evidence in the main tending to show that
the San Miguel residents need frequent bus service between their town
and Manila at all hours of the day; that while there are buses passing
through San Miguel, the same, except on few occasions, are nearly so
loaded that the San Miguel passengers can hardly be accommodated; that
only a bus service from San Miguel to Manila, and vice versa, can
assure the people of San Miguel of having transportation between the
two points; that the town of San Miguel has a population of about
35,000, two markets and three market days, and about 200 merchants who
regularly have to make purchases in Manila, in addition to many
students, employees and laborers travelling daily between the two
points.
Upon the other hand, the oppositors have relied on the testimony of
Agents Marabut and Carpio regarding the passenger loads of buses at San
Miguel during a period of nine days, as well as on their reports.
According to the Public Service Commission, the checkers’ reports
corroborate the testimony of respondent’s witnesses to the effect that,
because most of the buses passing through San Miguel for Manila already
carried a sufficient load of passengers, the San Miguel residents could
not be certain of being accommodated therein; and although said reports
show the number of passengers at San Miguel, they do not indicate how
many passengers boarded upon departure of the buses from Manila, or
whether they could accommodate all the passengers from Manila whose
destination was San Miguel.
Upon the evidence thus presented, the Public Service Commission
rendered a decision granting respondent’s application, with the express
finding that there is a need for permitting the operation of a bus
service from Manila with terminal at San Miguel, Bulacan, and that such
a service would be much more convenient and would promote the interest
of the public of San Miguel than the existing bus services which only
pass that town. The authorization of the proposed services would
provide the people of San Miguel with bus facilities in their own town
and would assure them of the means of transportation which the evidence
establishes they need. We find from the evidence that public
convenience will be promoted by permitting the applicant to operate six
buses on the line of San Miguel-Manila and vice-versa.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for review. It is
noteworthy that, out of the various original oppositors to respondent’s
application, only two were interested enough to present evidence in
their behalf, and only one, herein petitioner, took the trouble of
appealing from the decision of the Commission.
It is now elementary that this Court will not substitute its
judgment for that of the Public Service Commission on questions of fact
and will interfere only when it clearly appears that there is no
evidence to sustain its decision. In this case we cannot say that the
appealed decision is lacking in evidentiary support.
It is contended for the petitioner that the granting of respondent’s
application would result in destructive competition against existing
operators between Baliwag and Manila, as well as other operators beyond
Baliwag, whose buses pass through San Miguel. This contention loses its
point when it is recalled, as indicated in the brief for the
respondent, that the petitioner did not file any opposition to the
applications for additional service between Baliwag and Manila of
Enrique de Leon, Gaudencio Nicolas, Pascual Tuazon, and the respondent,
granted by the Public Service Commission after the decision in the case
at bar either is there merit in petitioner’s argument that the existing
operators whose bus service touches the town of San Miguel, should have
been given priority in supplying any deficiency. The petitioner
obviously had failed to offer on any previous occasion to put up
additional units, and, at any rate, the San Miguel-Manila line may be
deemed to be new and independent.
Wherefore, the appealed decision is affirmed and it is so ordered with costs against, the petitioner.
Pablo, Montemayor, Jugo, Labrador, Bengzon, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo, and Concepcion, JJ., concur.