EL VARADERO DE MANILA, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. INSULAR LUMBER COMPANY, DEFENDANT AND APPELLEE.

MALCOLM, J.:

El Varadero de Manila completed satisfactorily certain repairs on the lighter
Tatlo, the property of the Insular Lumber Company. The work was performed
pursuant to no express agreement, but with the implicit understanding that the
price would be as low as, or lower than, could be secured from any other
company.

The Insular Lumber Company being of the opinion that the bill as presented by
El Varadero de Manila was grossly exorbitant and a proposed compromise having
failed of realization, the matter was taken to court, with the result that in
the Court of First Instance of Manila, El Varadero de Manila, the plaintiff,
secured judgment against the Insular Lumber Company, the defendant, in the
amount of P5,310.70, with legal interest from the presentation of the complaint,
and costs. Still dissatisfied, the plaintiff has appealed to this court and here
has asked us to increase the amount of the judgment to P12,412.62.

To arrive at as correct a judgment as is possible, it will first be necessary
to set down a number of figures and thereafter to seize upon a few salient facts
as having influence.

The itemized bill presented by the plaintiff, the amount which it still
claims, totals P12,412.62. At one time during the course of the negotiations,
the plaintiff was willing to accept P10,241.37. (Exhibit I.) The witnesses for
the plaintiff naturally took the view that the bill was correct. But the trial
judge was of the opinion that it was excessive.

The defendant, on the other hand, says that a reasonable figure for the work
would be P5,310.70. Witnesses were offered to substantiate this contention.
Their testimony so impressed the trial judge that he adopted their statements as
his own. During’ the course of the abortive negotiations, however, the defendant
expressed a willingness to pay the plaintiff P8,070.12. (Exhibit G.)

Now to emphasize three points which will materially assist us in rendering
judgment. The first point relates to the offer of compromise which naturally,
under the general rules of evidence, must be excluded, except that as the
amounts named in the offers to accept certain sums in settlement appear to have
been arrived at as a fair estimate of value, they are relevant. (City of
Springfield vs. Schmook [1878], 68 Mo., 394; Daniels vs. Town of Woonsocket
[1874], 11 R. I., 4; Teasley vs. Bradley [1900], 110 Ga., 497.) Here, there was
no denial of liability and the only question discussed was the amount to be paid
which the plaintiff insisted should not be less than P10,241.37, and which the
defendant insisted should not be more than P8,070.12. The second point of
interest relates to the testimony of Mariano Yengko, inspector of vessels,
admittedly a disinterested witness, who in one synopsis of a fair value of the
repairs, arrived at P5,134.20, but which, on cross- examination, he raised to
between seven and eight thousand pesos. And the third point is that the tacit
understanding between the parties was that the cost of the repairs should be
approximately the same as what other companies would charge. The defendant
admits that El Varadero de Navotas would have done the work for about
P8,000.

Basing our findings, therefore, on the foregoing considerations, we are of
the opinion that the reasonable value of the repairs performed by El
Varadero de Manila on the Tatlo owned by the Insular Lumber Company, was
something less than P8,000. We fix the sum definitely at P7,700.

Judgment is modified, and in lieu of the judgment rendered in the lower
court, another shall issue in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant
for the recovery of P7,700, with legal interest to begin to run from the date
when this judgment shall become final and to continue until payment, without
express finding as to costs in either in- stance. So ordered.

Street, Avancena, Villamor, Ostrand, and Romualdez, JJ.,
concur.