ILOILO TRANSPORTATION CO., INC., PETITIONER AND APPELLANT, VS. PANAY AUTOBUS COMPANY ET AL., OPPOSITORS AND APPELLEES.

This is an appeal taken by Iloilo
Transportation Co., Inc., from the decision rendered by the Public
Service Commission denying its application for a certificate of public
convenience to operate one hundred (100) autocalesas within
the territorial limits of the City of Iloilo and the neighboring
municipalities of La Paz, Jaro, Mandurriao, Molo, Arevalo and Oton,
including the suburbs or barrios thereof.

In case No. 36259 of the Public Service Commission, said appellant
filed an application for a certificate of public convenience to operate
within said territory one hundred (100) four-wheeled autocalesas,
with authority to charge the following rates: Fifty centavos for every
half hour; tt for every hour; P0.60 for every successive hour; P0.05
for every passenger within the limits of Iloilo, La Paz, Jaro,
Mandurriao and Molo; and P0.10 for every passenger from Iloilo to any
of the municipalities of Arevalo and Oton, including any of the above
stated intermediate towns. The autocalesas would be operated without any fixed route or time-table.

The application was opposed by Isabel Ledesma, the only appellee
who filed her brief, Panay Autobus Company, Jovita Alfaras, all
operators of truck services in the Province of Iloilo, Bilbao Garage
& Taxicab, operator of another garage and taxicab service, and the
associations of owners and drivers of horse drawn vehicles, which are
rendering similar services in the City of Iloilo and in the neighboring
towns of La Paz, Jaro, Mandurriao and Molo.

By agreement of the parties the justice of the peace of the City of
Iloilo was commissioned to receive all evidence, which in fact was
presented before him.

After carefully reviewing and weighing said evidence, the Public
Service Commission rendered judgment holding that the proposed autocalesa
service would not promote the interest or convenience of the
inhabitants of the territory in question, and that its establishment
would only constitute an unlawful and ruinous competition with the
other public services already long established, consisting of
autotrucks, garage cars, and taxicabs operated in the same territory,
the former covering practically the entire Province of Iloilo.

In brief, the appellant contends that the commission erred in
holding that the proposed service would not adequately or conveniently
promote the interest of said inhabitants, and in denying its
application.

We have carefully reviewed all the evidence presented and are
convinced that the same clearly and reasonably supports the conclusion
arrived at by the commission. If it is borne in mind that the
population of the affected territory does not exceed 85,000, and that
actually there are other public service trucks, garage cars and
taxicabs, excluding horsedrawn carromatas or calesas, which are rendering adequate and efficient service to said inhabitants, it necessarily follows that the proposed autocalesa service will give rise to unlawful and ruinous competition with the operators of said existing services.

In support of its contention, the appellant cites some cases in which the commission granted certificates to operate autocalesas
in the towns of Bacolod and Davao, but the doctrine laid down in said
cases cannot be invoked as a precedent in this case where the facts and
circumstances are substantially different.

Wherefore, finding that the appealed decision is sufficiently and
reasonably supported by the evidence, the same is affirmed, with costs
against the appellant. So ordered.

Malcolm, Villa-Real, Butte, and Goddard, JJ., concur.